• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Texas DA won't prosecute people caught in the Dateline Predator sting

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: Queasy
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: rbV5
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Queasy
Reading everything that happened in that article, I can certainly see why the prosecutor would have a hard time pursuing it. Many of these cases would be problematic at best with them not being in this DA's jurisdiction and NBC and the police unable to guarantee that chat logs were accurate and complete.</end quote></div>

Yea sure, thats what we've heard from all the other DA's around the county involved in the Dateline cases.:roll:</end quote></div>

If a person chats online in another county and never enters this DA's county to meet up with underage boys/girls, how could he prosecute them? It would be the responsibility of the DA in the county that the accused person is from.

Sure, 24 men showed up within his jurisdiction however.... I guess we just blanket pardon their unfortunate actions I suppose 😉
 
Originally posted by: waggy
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Queasy
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: rbV5
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Queasy
Reading everything that happened in that article, I can certainly see why the prosecutor would have a hard time pursuing it. Many of these cases would be problematic at best with them not being in this DA's jurisdiction and NBC and the police unable to guarantee that chat logs were accurate and complete.</end quote></div>

Yea sure, thats what we've heard from all the other DA's around the county involved in the Dateline cases.:roll:</end quote></div>

If a person chats online in another county and never enters this DA's county to meet up with underage boys/girls, how could he prosecute them? It would be the responsibility of the DA in the county that the accused person is from.</end quote></div>

not to mention if they can't prove the chat logs from start to finish there is problems.


Here's an interesting LOG you might want to look at.
 
Originally posted by: rbV5
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: waggy
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Queasy
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: rbV5
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Queasy
Reading everything that happened in that article, I can certainly see why the prosecutor would have a hard time pursuing it. Many of these cases would be problematic at best with them not being in this DA's jurisdiction and NBC and the police unable to guarantee that chat logs were accurate and complete.</end quote></div>

Yea sure, thats what we've heard from all the other DA's around the county involved in the Dateline cases.:roll:</end quote></div>

If a person chats online in another county and never enters this DA's county to meet up with underage boys/girls, how could he prosecute them? It would be the responsibility of the DA in the county that the accused person is from.</end quote></div>

not to mention if they can't prove the chat logs from start to finish there is problems.



</end quote></div>


Here's an interesting LOG you might want to look at.


what part of the DA or police can not gurentee they are complete and true?

thats even ignoring that the DA has NO juristiction.

I am really suprised more people are not fighting it and winning over it.
 
The DA knew what was going to happen.

Had he been willing to push, he coul dhave assigned police officers to cover his concerns.

At present, he now looks bad due to the death and does not want to taint his hands any further.
 
Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: josh0099
I see their point, on not wanting to lure them in, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't prosecute the guys they already have. Just never do the show in their city again that simple...</end quote></div>

The reason that the case was dropped was NOT because they were lured into the city, but because the DA found that there was not enough credible evidence to prosecute. In the DA's opinion, the chat logs could not be used either because it was a case of entrapment, etc.

I don't think an entrapment defense would work since the defendent would have to show that he was induced by the cops to commit it. In this case, a number of defendents came willingly from out of town. They had every opportunity to turn around and go home, but they chose not to.
 
Originally posted by: flashbacck
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: josh0099
I see their point, on not wanting to lure them in, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't prosecute the guys they already have. Just never do the show in their city again that simple...</end quote></div>

The reason that the case was dropped was NOT because they were lured into the city, but because the DA found that there was not enough credible evidence to prosecute. In the DA's opinion, the chat logs could not be used either because it was a case of entrapment, etc.</end quote></div>

I don't think an entrapment defense would work since the defendent would have to show that he was induced by the cops to commit it. In this case, a number of defendents came willingly from out of town. They had every opportunity to turn around and go home, but they chose not to.

also they said to get around the entrapment they had to make sure the person contacted them first.

wich is part of being able to prove the chat log is full and correct.

 
Originally posted by: waggy
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: rbV5
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: waggy
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Queasy
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: rbV5
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Queasy
Reading everything that happened in that article, I can certainly see why the prosecutor would have a hard time pursuing it. Many of these cases would be problematic at best with them not being in this DA's jurisdiction and NBC and the police unable to guarantee that chat logs were accurate and complete.</end quote></div>

Yea sure, thats what we've heard from all the other DA's around the county involved in the Dateline cases.:roll:</end quote></div>

If a person chats online in another county and never enters this DA's county to meet up with underage boys/girls, how could he prosecute them? It would be the responsibility of the DA in the county that the accused person is from.</end quote></div>

not to mention if they can't prove the chat logs from start to finish there is problems.



</end quote></div>


Here's an interesting LOG you might want to look at.
</end quote></div>


what part of the DA or police can not gurentee they are complete and true?

thats even ignoring that the DA has NO juristiction.

I am really suprised more people are not fighting it and winning over it.


Clearly the DA had jurisdiction over the 24 cases where some guy showed up in Murphy to molest one of the town's young boys. I guess you can also ignore Perverted Justice's overwhelming conviction rate or the amount of pervs that cop a plea without ever needing to be humiliated in trial.

I'd be pissed at the DA in my county.
 
Originally posted by: Juice Box
I really hate to play devil's advocate in this case, but I've always had a problem with this show. This is the closest to Minority Report's "Pre-Crime" unit that I have ever seen. These people have committed no crimes, and were being tried as if they had. While yes, the pedophile issue needs to be taken care of...I do not think that they should be stripped of their rights and arrested before a crime is committed. I know it sounds horrible, but I still think it's unfair.

Planning, preparing, and attempting to have sex with little children is very much a crime. Just like planning to murder someone is a crime even though no murder actually took place.

 
Originally posted by: rbV5
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: waggy
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: rbV5
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: waggy
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Queasy
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: rbV5
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Queasy
Reading everything that happened in that article, I can certainly see why the prosecutor would have a hard time pursuing it. Many of these cases would be problematic at best with them not being in this DA's jurisdiction and NBC and the police unable to guarantee that chat logs were accurate and complete.</end quote></div>

Yea sure, thats what we've heard from all the other DA's around the county involved in the Dateline cases.:roll:</end quote></div>

If a person chats online in another county and never enters this DA's county to meet up with underage boys/girls, how could he prosecute them? It would be the responsibility of the DA in the county that the accused person is from.</end quote></div>

not to mention if they can't prove the chat logs from start to finish there is problems.



</end quote></div>


Here's an interesting LOG you might want to look at.
</end quote></div>


what part of the DA or police can not gurentee they are complete and true?

thats even ignoring that the DA has NO juristiction.

I am really suprised more people are not fighting it and winning over it.
</end quote></div>


Clearly the DA had jurisdiction over the 24 cases where some guy showed up in Murphy to molest one of the town's young boys. I guess you can also ignore Perverted Justice's overwhelming conviction rate or the amount of pervs that cop a plea without ever needing to be humiliated in trial.

I'd be pissed at the DA in my county.

i don't like it either. but i can understand why he is doing it. they should have had police in every step of it.

shrug.
 
Originally posted by: techs
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Alone
Who cares if they use it for entertainment? They're catching Jews and the bottom line is that's what fucking matters.</end quote></div>
Fixed.

Che?
 
Originally posted by: waggy
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: rbV5
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: waggy
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: rbV5
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: waggy
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Queasy
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: rbV5
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Queasy
Reading everything that happened in that article, I can certainly see why the prosecutor would have a hard time pursuing it. Many of these cases would be problematic at best with them not being in this DA's jurisdiction and NBC and the police unable to guarantee that chat logs were accurate and complete.</end quote></div>

Yea sure, thats what we've heard from all the other DA's around the county involved in the Dateline cases.:roll:</end quote></div>

If a person chats online in another county and never enters this DA's county to meet up with underage boys/girls, how could he prosecute them? It would be the responsibility of the DA in the county that the accused person is from.</end quote></div>

not to mention if they can't prove the chat logs from start to finish there is problems.



</end quote></div>


Here's an interesting LOG you might want to look at.
</end quote></div>


what part of the DA or police can not gurentee they are complete and true?

thats even ignoring that the DA has NO juristiction.

I am really suprised more people are not fighting it and winning over it.
</end quote></div>


Clearly the DA had jurisdiction over the 24 cases where some guy showed up in Murphy to molest one of the town's young boys. I guess you can also ignore Perverted Justice's overwhelming conviction rate or the amount of pervs that cop a plea without ever needing to be humiliated in trial.

I'd be pissed at the DA in my county.</end quote></div>

i don't like it either. but i can understand why he is doing it. they should have had police in every step of it.

shrug.

Police were involved, as was the City Manager...it was the Mayor and City council who were out of the loop, which makes perfect sense to me.

I'm sure THIS DA is right, and Perverted Justice and all the rest of the DA's involved in "To Catch a Predator" have been wrong.

The fact is, "To catch a Predator" is doing the job that that particular DA "should" be doing himself.

Since he is not, he should be helping them in any way he can instead of putting up roadblocks in the guise of some procedural nonsense. Makes it sound to me like he is protecting "someone", or his "territory" instead of the "kids" in his county.

Looks like Perverted Justice has no trouble with convictions operating just as they did in Murphy Texas, why does "this" DA think they will in his court room? are Texas laws protecting the pervs, or is it law enforcement?
 
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: rbV5
I think its odd that the community went after the City Manager, and were more upset with the camera crews than the pervs....maybe they don't want the light shining in, 'specially from outsiders........only in Texas I guess.</end quote></div>

from my understanding of the story, the pedos weren't from that city (or at least most of them), but were rather lured there for the sting operation. people were upset that the city manager made the decision to bring pedos into town in return for cash.

and, of course, technically it's not pedo to be attracted to someone with fully developed secondary sexual characteristics.
 
Originally posted by: techs
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Alone
Who cares if they use it for entertainment? They're catching Jews and the bottom line is that's what fucking matters.</end quote></div>
Fixed.

why did you say that?
 
Appears that Texas likey much child rape, and public humiliation to discourage it is not good because it apparently discourages a Texas pasttime.
 
Originally posted by: tw1164
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: techs
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Alone
Who cares if they use it for entertainment? They're catching Jews and the bottom line is that's what fucking matters.</end quote></div>
Fixed.

</end quote></div>

why did you say that?
When people advocate fascism it is a good idea to remind them of the consequences.

 
Originally posted by: ElFenix
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: rbV5
I think its odd that the community went after the City Manager, and were more upset with the camera crews than the pervs....maybe they don't want the light shining in, 'specially from outsiders........only in Texas I guess.</end quote></div>

from my understanding of the story, the pedos weren't from that city (or at least most of them), but were rather lured there for the sting operation. people were upset that the city manager made the decision to bring pedos into town in return for cash.

and, of course, technically it's not pedo to be attracted to someone with fully developed secondary sexual characteristics.

People are stupid. They lured these guys to a specific house where they were confronted and arrested. What do people think is going to happen? As the pedophile is driving through their town to his destination, is he going to rape random children along the way? Or after he is arrested and released, is he going to say to himself "oh, I really liked that town. I think I'll go there and rape children." Do these people think pedophiles are unaware of their town and will start raping their children now that they know of it?
 
Originally posted by: techs
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: tw1164
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: techs
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Alone
Who cares if they use it for entertainment? They're catching Jews and the bottom line is that's what fucking matters.</end quote></div>
Fixed.

</end quote></div>

why did you say that?</end quote></div>
When people advocate fascism it is a good idea to remind them of the consequences.

This is one of the stupidest things I've seen posted here. Yeah, this is comparable to the holocaust. Catching actual criminals is comparable to exterminating a race. :roll:

Oh - Godwin's Law, you lose.
 
Originally posted by: mugs
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: techs
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: tw1164
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: techs
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Alone
Who cares if they use it for entertainment? They're catching Jews and the bottom line is that's what fucking matters.</end quote></div>
Fixed.

</end quote></div>

why did you say that?</end quote></div>
When people advocate fascism it is a good idea to remind them of the consequences.

</end quote></div>

This is one of the stupidest things I've seen posted here. Yeah, this is comparable to the holocaust. Catching actual criminals is comparable to exterminating a race. :roll:

Oh - Godwin's Law, you lose.



Tyrannical governments start small. history has shown time after time... the constitution is there for a reason. To trample on the constitution even a little bit, is one step away from using it as toilet paper...
 
Originally posted by: mugs
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: ElFenix
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: rbV5
I think its odd that the community went after the City Manager, and were more upset with the camera crews than the pervs....maybe they don't want the light shining in, 'specially from outsiders........only in Texas I guess.</end quote></div>

from my understanding of the story, the pedos weren't from that city (or at least most of them), but were rather lured there for the sting operation. people were upset that the city manager made the decision to bring pedos into town in return for cash.

and, of course, technically it's not pedo to be attracted to someone with fully developed secondary sexual characteristics.</end quote></div>

People are stupid. They lured these guys to a specific house where they were confronted and arrested. What do people think is going to happen? As the pedophile is driving through their town to his destination, is he going to rape random children along the way? Or after he is arrested and released, is he going to say to himself "oh, I really liked that town. I think I'll go there and rape children." Do these people think pedophiles are unaware of their town and will start raping their children now that they know of it?


Well, I doubt "not prosecuting" a couple dozen pervs that came to their town to molest their children is going to be much of a deterrent..... and yes I think it may make their little town a little more attractive to those bastards.

Murphy is only a little smaller than my town, and I welcome Dateline or Perverted Justice to pull their little pedo party over here.


 
Originally posted by: waggy
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: rbV5
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: waggy
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Queasy
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: rbV5
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Queasy
Reading everything that happened in that article, I can certainly see why the prosecutor would have a hard time pursuing it. Many of these cases would be problematic at best with them not being in this DA's jurisdiction and NBC and the police unable to guarantee that chat logs were accurate and complete.</end quote></div>

Yea sure, thats what we've heard from all the other DA's around the county involved in the Dateline cases.:roll:</end quote></div>

If a person chats online in another county and never enters this DA's county to meet up with underage boys/girls, how could he prosecute them? It would be the responsibility of the DA in the county that the accused person is from.</end quote></div>

not to mention if they can't prove the chat logs from start to finish there is problems.



</end quote></div>


Here's an interesting LOG you might want to look at.
</end quote></div>


what part of the DA or police can not gurentee they are complete and true?

thats even ignoring that the DA has NO juristiction.

I am really suprised more people are not fighting it and winning over it.


That's just it, most people aren't going to fight it because they don't want to be the one that gets dragged through the newspapers as a pedophile trying to get out of it.

I for one am glad that the DA here stood up and saw what was really going on. I bet you can go through the chat logs that Dateline and perverted justice handed over and find out that they are really the ones that initiated the whole ordeal. RATINGS=$$$ It's been proven time and time again that people will do anything and lie about anything to make a buck.
I'm not saying that these guys are right for wanting to meet little kids, but I think the people running perverted justice have been doing it long enough that they know just how to get the guy that wouldn't do it, and have him show up.

Also, since the person chatting for perverted justice is not a law enforcement official, anything in the chat log would thusly be un-admissible in court as it was written by an adult pretending to be a child, thus the entire chat session was fantasy. And arresting someone for showing up at the house is also speculative as you can shw intent, but not actual commitment of a crime, especially since there is no child there.

The DA is refusing to try these men not because he thinks they are all saints and pillars of the community, he isn't trying them because due process laws were not followed thus if he tried them and someone appealed and over turned it, the city/county would be sued for a sh!t load of money.
 
Back
Top