'DATELINE' SUED IN SEX-STING SUICIDE

July 18, 2007 -- THE sister of a veteran Texas prosecutor who blew his brains out as he was about to be busted in an underage-sex sting set up by "Dateline" is slapping NBC with a $100 million suit.

Louis "Bill" Conradt grabbed a gun and shot himself as he spotted cops, reporter Chris Hansen and a camera crew from the popular "To Catch a Predator" segment outside his home on Nov. 5, 2006, according to a notice of claim sent to NBC yesterday.

The suit will be filed Monday in Manhattan Federal Court on behalf of his estate, said Patricia Conradt's lawyer, Bruce Baron.

"NBC was responsible for his death. They conducted their sting operation and intentionally and with negligence sensationalized the situation," Baron said.

"It brought it to the point that he died of a self inflicted gun shot wound."

The 56-year-old prosecutor, a highly praised 20-year-law enforcement veteran, allegedly went online to solicit sex from a 13-year-old boy.

Hansen and a "Dateline" crew tagged along with cops to the prosecutor's home to capture the arrest.

NBC said if a suit is filed, "we will defend ourselves vigorously, as we believe the claims are completely without merit."

http://www.nypost.com/seven/07182007/tv/dateline_sued_in_sex_sting_suicide_tv_cynthia_r__f agen.htm

I love it.

He's a child predator but it's the fault of NBC that his perversion was about to be made known to the whole world.

This is an opportunity via the court system to send a message to these freaks that this particular crime will have no leniency. IF she gets a single penny over this, it will set a precedent that is dangerous in the extreme.

I hope Dateline goes fully public with this and receives full public support.

I'm with you, Sal.

I disagree with both of you.

The man MIGHT have been a sexual predator. If he was he should have been arrested, tried, and IF convicted, sentenced.

That is not what NBC was doing. NBC by televising the arrest on national television was trying and convicting him without benefit of trial. Once a person is accused of being a sexual predator, especially on national television there is no way of ever getting one's life back even if found innocent.


It may be popular to want to see sexual predators punished but that does not trump the rule of law. NBC instigated the sting for ratings purposes and not out of concern for anyone involved with the case. Hopefully we are not yet at the bread and circuses stage of our existence and NBC will be hit with a hefty penalty.

It may be popular to want to see sexual predators punished but that does not trump the rule of law.

I agree it does not trump the law.

NBC instigated the sting for ratings purposes and not out of concern for anyone involved with the case.
Absolutely NBC instigated the sting for the ratings. And everyone who has not been living in a cave knows they have been doing these stings for over a year. So what the hell was he doing there and why did he choose to blow his brains out? We don't know.

But suing NBC is not going to allow us to see what was in his head either. Her law suit is an abuse of the system Frogger. It is a load of crap designed to make money for her.

As for NBC not having a concern for anyone involved in the case... they are a corporation with the purpose of making money through entertainment. That does not mean that the individuals involved in said sting did not care deeply about what they were doing. I think said sting and it's "exposure" on TV may have helped the police in innumerable ways. They were likely extremely grateful for the help and the public awareness that it created.

If he was not guilty he should have manned up and fought this himself. As it is, he tried, convicted and executed himself. Self judgement. A shame and a tragedy for his family but telling.



Hopefully we are not yet at the bread and circuses stage of our existence and NBC will be hit with a hefty penalty

Are you kidding? Reality shows are what the general public feed on, in a frenzy I might add. They devour the no mind crap. We are already there and long past. May as well save a few kids along the way.

Collin County, Texas (http://www.pegasusnews.com/news/2007/jun/01/murphysi-catch-predatori-cases-canned-collin-count/) DA won't prosecute cases based on "To Catch a Predator".

Collin County, Texas (http://www.pegasusnews.com/news/2007/jun/01/murphysi-catch-predatori-cases-canned-collin-count/) DA won't prosecute cases based on "To Catch a Predator".

Now that's intriguing .... they fired her ass for expressing "ethical concerns". Disconcerting. This is going to be interesting to follow.

The defense could argue entrapment.. as I've read that many of the victims initiate the subject of sex and/or money,tho I don't know if any defense has of yet used this as a successful argument.

I have never seen this show, nor do I have a desire to do so. It appears to be trashy tabloid journalism. Sure, they might be getting rid of a few molesters/potential molesters. The dumb ones, that is, the bottom feeders. How hard is it to get rid of those of that ilk?

The smarter ones use much different methods and are quite successful, over time spans covering years.

Yet I suppose the show serves its own kind of purpose. Even if it helps but a few kids, teaches them to be more careful, it is doing a good service.

The defense could argue entrapment.. as I've read that many of the victims initiate the subject of sex and/or money,tho I don't know if any defense has of yet used this as a successful argument.

I have never seen this show, nor do I have a desire to do so. It appears to be trashy tabloid journalism. Sure, they might be getting rid of a few molesters/potential molesters. The dumb ones, that is, the bottom feeders. How hard is it to get rid of those of that ilk?

The smarter ones use much different methods and are quite successful, over time spans covering years.

Yet I suppose the show serves its own kind of purpose. Even if it helps but a few kids, teaches them to be more careful, it is doing a good service.

Not limited to THE DUMB ONES, THAT IS, THE BOTTOM FEEDERS, Ren. Teachers, doctors, engineers, military men.... people from all walks of life have been busted.

The problem with conviction is -- NBC stops short of allowing them to actually TOUCH the decoy. (in the last episode I watched, they had an 18-yr old pretending to be a 12-yr old... she was very convincing.)

Don't think the audience would accept taking the predators another step toward actually carrying out sexual relations with an underage female they met on the internet. But because they also have copies of all the online exchanges these guys made with the undercover gal, it's a little difficult to believe they have nothing more on their minds when they get there than just sitting and talking.

Here's what I can't believe... this show has been on for a few years now and MEN CONTINUE TO PURSUE YOUNG GIRLS THEY 'MEET' ONLINE!

Speaks volumes for the part of the anatomy SOME males use for decision-making.

Personally, I'm glad to see even one of those guys publicly humiliated, even if their punishment is just a slap on the wrist.

The solution is simple: Quit trying to have sex with minor children and you won't to worry about being caught on a trashy national TV show.

:slap:
SMW

QUOTE=smartmouthwoman] But because they also have copies of all the online exchanges these guys made with the undercover gal, it's a little difficult to believe they have nothing more on their minds when they get there than just sitting and talking.



[/QUOTE]

That certainly appears to be true, SMW.


By "dumb ones", I should clarify to mean that they are stupid criminals.

After studying criminal behavior for over 35 years, I've learned that many of society's smartest, most intelligent, best-educated individuals, make the dumbest crooks.

Good for us!

[QUOTE=~Sal~] If he was not guilty he should have manned up and fought this himself. As it is, he tried, convicted and executed himself. Self judgement. A shame and a tragedy for his family but telling.





Exactly...he made himself look guilty by killing himself and his sister is trying to reap the benefits of his death.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/07182007/tv/dateline_sued_in_sex_sting_suicide_tv_cynthia_r__f agen.htm

Goot.The show.once began as an Investigative Documentary
on Teen Predators on the net.
Nows it's become a Series.
It's nuthin more than cheap entrappment.I'm supposed to believe
there all these little teen cuties,just beggin to hook-up with
older guys.
Well I guess if Maury can build an emtire career oughta
exposing trashy behavior Via his special Envelops {DNA results}
and his Monkey audience,just can't git enough.

I've only seen a show or two of it, but from what I understand they use an adult to lure the sexual predators. Thank goodness it was them and not a real child because we'd be seeing a whole different story on tv then.

I think it's great they do it, they are clearing the trash off the streets and putting them jail right where they belong. They have every intention of hurting a child, so what if the tv crew is there or not, they are still guilty.

True, I read a case in NY where a man and his wife were set up in a string operation, wanting a threesome with a supposed willing 15 yo girl*an uncover cop*. No tv crews were present but they got the scum.

Who cares if the crew is there and tape it, the fact still remains they showed up to break the law anyway, and are therefore guilty. In the shows I've ssen the predators have all admitted their intentions and guilt to the camera.

Sal's right, sounds like this guy used self judgement and killed himself. Too bad that don't happen more often.

Collin County, Texas (http://www.pegasusnews.com/news/2007/jun/01/murphysi-catch-predatori-cases-canned-collin-count/) DA won't prosecute cases based on "To Catch a Predator".

The reason those cases were dismissed, according to what I read, was because Dateline had all of the defendants coming from one county soliciting a minor in a second county and arrested the defendants in a third county. So basically, Dateline was trying to get a DA to prosecute people who didn't commit a crime within their jurisdiction. Anyways, that's just a little jfyi.

On a different note, I find the ethics of these shows somewhat debatable. It's not like these defendants are kidnapping 12 year olds and raping them. They're in some internet chatroom and they end up chatting with some disembodied girl who soon-after reveals her minor-age. The "minor" girl encourages sexual talk and eventually invites the defendant over to her place. At that place, they have an adult female (or male) who "acts" like they're minors and invites this total stranger into her/his home. After some brief conversation, Dateline steps in.

Now, I'm all for targetting "sexual predators" but I suspect this show ends up criminalizing a lot of men who aren't really threats to society. First off, they're not targetting an unwilling participant. How many 12-year old girls out there are trying to have sex with lonely 40 year old guys? Not very many, no doubt. So what you end up with are a bunch of typically middle-aged guys trying to live out some sexual fantasy that would have likely never come to fruition. But they're now occupying jail space based on nothing more than an illegal solicitation. Personally, I think jail space should be reserved for people who make you fear for the safety of the general public, not someone who gave in to a sexual temptation.

Not only that, these people become labelled "sex offenders" for the rest of their lives. For all we know, these "sex offenders" could be friggin virgins. I guess I just hate it when society overuses severe terms like "sex offender" to describe an activity which is not necessarily associated with that term. When I hear "sex offender," I'm thinking of someone who raped or molested someone....categorizing "Dateline" offenders under this term waters down the term for me.

Don't get me wrong, soliciting minors is and should be criminal. But I don't think that's a crime that we should ruin people's lives over.

If some middle-aged guy is trying to live out a sexual fantasy with what he thinks is a 12-year-old girl, he's still not right in the head, period! If he even continues talking to what he thinks is a 12-year-old girl, he is wrong. What's wrong with these perverts who get off on the thought or 'fantasy' of being with a child?????????? There's a lot wrong with it!!

The reason those cases were dismissed, according to what I read, was because Dateline had all of the defendants coming from one county soliciting a minor is a second county and arrested the defendants in a third county. So basically, Dateline was trying to get a DA to prosecute people who didn't commit a crime within their jurisdiction. Anyways, that's just a little jfyi.

On a different note, I find the ethics of these shows somewhat debatable. It's not like these defendants are kidnapping 12 year olds and raping them. They're in some internet chatroom and they end up chatting with some disembodied girl who soon-after reveals her minor-age. The "minor" girl encourages sexual talk and eventually invites the defendant over to her place. At that place, they have an adult female (or male) who "acts" like they're minors and invites this total stranger into her/his home. After some brief conversation, Dateline steps in.

Now, I'm all for targetting "sexual predators" but I suspect this show ends up criminalizing a lot of men who aren't really threats to society. First off, they're not targetting an unwilling participant. How many 12-year old girls out there are trying to have sex with lonely 40 year old guys? Not very many, no doubt. So what you end up with are a bunch of typically middle-aged guys trying to live out some sexual fantasy that would have likely never come to fruition. But they're now occupying jail space based on nothing more than an illegal solicitation. Personally, I think jail space should be reserved for people who make you fear for the safety of the general public, not someone who gave in to a sexual temptation.

Not only that, these people become labelled "sex offenders" for the rest of their lives. For all we know, these "sex offenders" could be friggin virgins. I guess I just hate it when society overuses severe terms like "sex offender" to describe an activity which is not necessarily associated with that term. When I hear "sex offender," I'm thinking of someone who raped or molested someone....categorizing "Dateline" offenders under this term waters down the term for me.

Don't get me wrong, soliciting minors is and should be criminal. But I don't think that's a crime that we should ruin people's lives over.

Spoken like a true man, Leper.

"How many 12-year old girls out there are trying to have sex with lonely 40 year old guys? Not very many, no doubt."

More than you can imagine, dear. Not limited to 40 year old guys, though... many predators are in their 20's.

12-year old girls aren't known for being too bright or using very good judgment either. Just approaching 'woman-hood' is enough for many to start thinking of themself as 'grown' and part of that is being able to attract a man. Until the internet, the little games they play were pretty much harmless.

Men just need to understand that and take the lead in discouraging such 'come-ons' by treating them like what they are... children. Not setting up meetings to 'live out' their sexual fantasies simply because they think they've found a willing partner.

I think most of the distaste for Dateline's series is that it exposes a very disturbing aspect of our society. Easier to blame it on NBC than the perps.

SMW

If some middle-aged guy is trying to live out a sexual fantasy with what he thinks is a 12-year-old girl, he's still not right in the head, period! If he even continues talking to what he thinks is a 12-year-old girl, he is wrong. What's wrong with these perverts who get off on the thought or 'fantasy' of being with a child?????????? There's a lot wrong with it!!

They can no more stop bothering kids than they can stop breathing.
They are beyond rehab. Countless studies indicate such.
A few recognize their problem and do, literally, lifelong battle with it. I do respect their honesty.

Most are unable to , and give in to the temptation.

The most successful predators spend countless hours, weeks, years with young ones, as counselors, teachers, Boy and Girl Scout leaders, church groups, Little League, etc etc. They go where the victims are and integrate themselves with them.

They're very good at what they do. First and foremost, they gain the victim's trust..

Secondly, they are authority figures who wield tremendous clout.

Very very difficult to track and apprehend.
Solution?

Teach your kids if they feel that something is wrong, it is.

That's what I mean, Ren....how did this happen? I know a lot of it is more out in the open now, with the internet, etc., but how did so many people, men and women alike, start even THINKING this way. There's something wrong with a grown person wanting to have sex with children. I'm thankful to have grown up around men who liked grown women, not children!

No one knows for sure, kimi--what makes them prefer children to adults.

I will say this--many of them are social losers. I mean, they could no more maintain a regular, normal relationship with a grown man or woman than they could fly to Mars.

Also, the idea of dominance and control over the young--and it's so easy to do this to young ones, is an added plus in their eyes.

I wonder if any opinions here would change if they used young boys to lure adult females to the house? My opinion is that this show is all about ratings and convicting people before they ever reach a courtroom and have a chance to present a defense. I do not condone adults who prey on teens, but I can picture someone who actually wants to check on the welfare of a teen who "is crying out for help", and winds up having their life destroyed. I am sure that is not what the majority of those caught want, but it is possible.

I would have much more respect for the show if the decoy did not initiate the sex talk, and waited for the man to suggest meeting. That would be much more evidence of criminal intent, and much easier to prosecute. It would also be much rarer and require much more time and effort on the part of the show. It would cost more, and be less profitable.

Also, the idea of dominance and control over the young--and it's so easy to do this to young ones, is an added plus in their eyes.

Yes I think it is parallel to rape... it's about dominance and control....

Personally, I think jail space should be reserved for people who make you fear for the safety of the general public, not someone who gave in to a sexual temptation.

Doctors and rabbis and gym teachers who fantasize about children do make me fear for the safety of the general public. They make me fear for an element of the general public that most needs our protection.

A 12 year old child is not a sexual temptation. A 12 year old child is out of bounds period.

I wonder if any opinions here would change if they used young boys to lure adult females to the house?

I can honestly say that my opinion would stay the same, Imagineer.
A predator's a predator, regardless of sex, income, color, social status, or education level.

I would be just as pissed at grown women preying on young men, and this happens, also. It's adults wanting to have sexual contact with children....!

Wanting to help a teen crying out for help, would mean contact the authorities. Whether the decoy initiates the sex talk or not, these are grown men who let the conversations turn to sexual talk, then making plans to meet up with who they believe is a child. They are going with the full expectation of having sex with a child. They have all admitted it because they were caught in the process of trying to make it happen. I don't know how this is excusable in any form.

I can honestly say that my opinion would stay the same, Imagineer.
A predator's a predator, regardless of sex, income, color, social status, or education level.

Yes!

From my understanding of how the operation works, the predator has to initiate everything. e.g. talking about sex, asking to meet, and things of that nature. Dateline is being very careful to avoid entrapment.

On another note, I find that show hilarious. There was one guy who was caught twice. The second time, he was supposed to be at his hearing regarding the first time, but he blew it off only to get caught again.:lolhit:

From my understanding of how the operation works, the predator has to initiate everything. e.g. talking about sex, asking to meet, and things of that nature. Dateline is being very careful to avoid entrapment.

On another note, I find that show hilarious. There was one guy who was caught twice. The second time, he was supposed to be at his hearing regarding the first time, but he blew it off only to get caught again.:lolhit:

That's my understanding of it, too. The predator is just that, a predator and he/she/whatever initiates the contact, setting up the meeting, etc.

I've watched it a few times and from what I've seen, the "victim" NEVER initiates sexual conversation or suggests meeting.

I'm not sure what to think about the show... Something about the way they do it seems a little legally suspect.

I disagree with both of you.

The man MIGHT have been a sexual predator. If he was he should have been arrested, tried, and IF convicted, sentenced.

That is not what NBC was doing. NBC by televising the arrest on national television was trying and convicting him without benefit of trial. Once a person is accused of being a sexual predator, especially on national television there is no way of ever getting one's life back even if found innocent.


It may be popular to want to see sexual predators punished but that does not trump the rule of law. NBC instigated the sting for ratings purposes and not out of concern for anyone involved with the case. Hopefully we are not yet at the bread and circuses stage of our existence and NBC will be hit with a hefty penalty.
And it must take a special kind of person to pretend to be a 13 year old boy or girl all day on the internet and flirt with these guys. They had one of these stings near where I live. Actually another county(Sonoma), it was in Petaluma,California north of San Francisco about 30 miles. One of the guys they caught was a doctor from SF. It's amazing how it is always the first time these guys have ever done this sort of thing. Or at least what they claim!:rolleyes:

after reading this whole thread,I wanna lock my daughters away until they are 50.

But........seeing as that's not truly possible,how about looking at the whole 12 year olds in chatrooms talking sex to a grown man.........WHERE THE HELL ARE THEIR PARENTS?
Why is a 12 year old allowed to have a computer in their room or be unserpervised on it? You can't place all the blame on the grown man or woman(although they should know better,shame on them) or just on the kid. Where and what are the parents of these kids when their innocent looking 12-13 year is parading themselves all over the internet and talking sex to grown ups?
I have a 12 year old and let me tell you,she isn't allowed to use the computer for more than a half an hour a day,the computer is a family computer and in my dining room where anyone and everyone can see what site she is on and she is not allowed to use a chat room or messenger service unless it's my personal Yahoo messenger. When my girls are done,I go through the history of the computer and check on where they were at,just to make sure they didn't come across a site I wouldn't want them accessing. Extreme? You better believe it,but at least I know my daughters are safe while browsing the internet.

after reading this whole thread,I wanna lock my daughters away until they are 50.

But........seeing as that's not truly possible,how about looking at the whole 12 year olds in chatrooms talking sex to a grown man.........WHERE THE HELL ARE THEIR PARENTS?
Why is a 12 year old allowed to have a computer in their room or be unserpervised on it? You can't place all the blame on the grown man or woman(although they should know better,shame on them) or just on the kid. Where and what are the parents of these kids when their innocent looking 12-13 year is parading themselves all over the internet and talking sex to grown ups?
I have a 12 year old and let me tell you,she isn't allowed to use the computer for more than a half an hour a day,the computer is a family computer and in my dining room where anyone and everyone can see what site she is on and she is not allowed to use a chat room or messenger service unless it's my personal Yahoo messenger. When my girls are done,I go through the history of the computer and check on where they were at,just to make sure they didn't come across a site I wouldn't want them accessing. Extreme? You better believe it,but at least I know my daughters are safe while browsing the internet.
Good idea, Michelle! I work with a lady who has 3 daughters and she feels exactly the same way... except she does not even allow a computer in her home! When they visit their grandmother (who does have a PC), they must follow the same rules you outlined.

You're right... the parents SHOULD be the ones on guard. But at the same time, there sure do seem to be alot of deviants out there to protect them from. And that's really sad.

:(
SMW

My parents have never been that stringent about checking the websites I've been on, nor have they ever really limited my internet time. (Although a couple times they may have tried. But anyways, they taught me to be smart about it and never give out my address or last name (although now I do, on my Facebook page ;) ). So the point is, parents should teach their kids how to be careful online and then the kids can have more freedom and the parents don't have to spend all that time going through the history. :)

DF,I feel this is the best way to help them understand to be careful while on the internet. They are smart girls,but it's easy to forget when you're 12 and 9 and just give info out. For example,there was a site I allowed my 12 year old to go on,BeingAGirl.com,they needed my authorization for her to sign up,I felt that was good after reading the whole thing over. Well,a few days later,I opened my e-mail up to find a message from what I thought was this site only to find out it had a link to a porn site. What if I had used my daughters e-mail addy and they opened that? If being extreme is what it takes to keep that stuff from my kids,then extreme I will be.

I don't condone what some adults who prey on children are doing,they deserve a 2x4 upside the head,I'm just saying that parents need to set boundries on stuff like computer usage and so on.

Well, to each his own. And I definitely applaud your interest in your children's safety - some parents don't seem to care at all.

I guess my parents knew that by the time I was 12 and got an interest in using the internet for something other than research for homework assignments, I already knew all about sex and porn and whatnot. And they told us all the time about internet safety at school. My parents have always trusted me almost completely since they know that I tell them pretty much everything.

I wonder if any opinions here would change if they used young boys to lure adult females to the house? My opinion is that this show is all about ratings and convicting people before they ever reach a courtroom and have a chance to present a defense. I do not condone adults who prey on teens, but I can picture someone who actually wants to check on the welfare of a teen who "is crying out for help", and winds up having their life destroyed. I am sure that is not what the majority of those caught want, but it is possible.

I would have much more respect for the show if the decoy did not initiate the sex talk, and waited for the man to suggest meeting. That would be much more evidence of criminal intent, and much easier to prosecute. It would also be much rarer and require much more time and effort on the part of the show. It would cost more, and be less profitable.

As much as I hate pedophiles I agree with imagineer. This isnt something they should be putting on TV. Do it, convict the scum and execute them, but why show it on TV? the stations bid to profit from this is almost as bad as the crime itself.

As much as I hate pedophiles I agree with imagineer. This isnt something they should be putting on TV. Do it, convict the scum and execute them, but why show it on TV? the stations bid to profit from this is almost as bad as the crime itself.

I actually think it has brought to light a serious problem, and one that a lot of people might not have ever been aware of, without the show. I think the entire thing is tasteless, but if it has saved even one child from being stalked and worse, then so be it.

It would do more if they publically executed convicted pedophiles. SHowing what they said to the girls and what the girls said back then watching them try to lie their way out of does nothing.

It would do more if they publically executed convicted pedophiles.
I think they should publicly execute every big-time criminal. Hell.....I say, let's bring back the gallows and break out the popcorn. Criminal activity would damn near cease to exist.

It would do more if they publically executed convicted pedophiles. SHowing what they said to the girls and what the girls said back then watching them try to lie their way out of does nothing.

Oh, I'm all for that, too!

I think they should publicly execute every big-time criminal. Hell.....I say, let's bring back the gallows and break out the popcorn. Criminal activity would damn near cease to exist.

No kidding...!

I wonder if any opinions here would change if they used young boys to lure adult females to the house?

I'd still have the same opinion if its was boys luring women. Sexual predators, male or female, need to be dealt with.

I do not condone adults who prey on teens, but I can picture someone who actually wants to check on the welfare of a teen who "is crying out for help", and winds up having their life destroyed. I am sure that is not what the majority of those caught want, but it is possible.

I'd have to disagree personally, Imagineer, only because if I was ever in the shoes of someone who knew of a teen crying out for help, I'd contact their parents, not show up at the door when they are alone.
Apparently, they have the address of the teen so instead of showing up, drop a note in the post to the parents explaining the situation.



I would have much more respect for the show if the decoy did not initiate the sex talk, and waited for the man to suggest meeting. That would be much more evidence of criminal intent, and much easier to prosecute. It would also be much rarer and require much more time and effort on the part of the show. It would cost more, and be less profitable.

This is wherre I was wrong I guess. I was under the impression the predator 'replied' to the teen and wanted to get together, thus the teens invite.

What I did hear on the show was NBC reading the chatroom log and it sounded to me as if the male continued the talk. Had he blocked them, knowing they were a teen, or left the room instead of talking to them,he wouldn't have been in a conversation in the first place. He appears guilty by continuing talking sex to an underage, and going to meet them.

Here's what I can't believe... this show has been on for a few years now and MEN CONTINUE TO PURSUE YOUNG GIRLS THEY 'MEET' ONLINE!

Speaks volumes for the part of the anatomy SOME males use for decision-making.

Personally, I'm glad to see even one of those guys publicly humiliated, even if their punishment is just a slap on the wrist.

The solution is simple: Quit trying to have sex with minor children and you won't to worry about being caught on a trashy national TV show.

:slap:
SMW

Gotta agree with you there, SMW. Often, these guys will admit that they've seen the show, but "never thought it would happen to me."

Assholes. Brainless sickos.

My opinion is that this show is all about ratings and convicting people before they ever reach a courtroom and have a chance to present a defense. Exactly.
If a police spokesman says "gunman" instead of "alleged gunman" during a TV interview he risks a lawsuit since the person isn't yet a convicted criminal.

How this show can mark someone for life and get away with it is very surprising.

Exactly.
If a police spokesman says "gunman" instead of "alleged gunman" during a TV interview he risks a lawsuit since the person isn't yet a convicted criminal.

How this show can mark someone for life and get away with it is very surprising.

I don't see how the airing of Dateline's show prevents these guys from having a fair trial. How many people in a jury panel are going to be able to remember a defendant from the TV show? Personally, I think I could maybe recognize one individual from watching the show a couple of times. And of those few that watch the show and can remember specific individuals, they can easily be stricken from the jury to ensure a fair trial.

[QUOTE=~Sal~] If he was not guilty he should have manned up and fought this himself. As it is, he tried, convicted and executed himself. Self judgement. A shame and a tragedy for his family but telling.





Exactly...he made himself look guilty by killing himself and his sister is trying to reap the benefits of his death.

Once someone is arrested on national t.v. and accused of being a sexual predator, pedophile there is no manning up. The mere charge is enough to totally ruin a person's life. Pedophilia and sexual predation should not be a subject for sweeps week.

I think there's a real big difference between this case and normal cases that are shown on the show. In this case, Chris Hansen and police went to the man's house, as opposed to having the man come to the decoy's house. It's real hard to feel sorry for the men who show up at the decoy's house, as it removes a lot of doubt if they would have had sex given the opportunity. Here, we don't really know.

Secondly, having Chris Hansen there along with the cameras probably did sensationalize the situation. Think about it; you're the solicitor and police show up at your door. You don't know really why they are there, obviously you're going to be terrified that they're on to your predatory ways but ultimately you don't know for sure. You see police, Chris Hansen, and TV cameras? You know exactly why they are there. In my opinion, it's very likely that he killed himself after seeing Chris Hansen and not the police officers. From the limited information we have, the solicitor has not actually pursued any children.

I don't know if the sister will win, (hell, I don't know if I want her to win.) but I think she has a legitimate case.

[QUOTE=Evil Homer]From my understanding of how the operation works, the predator has to initiate everything. e.g. talking about sex, asking to meet, and things of that nature. Dateline is being very careful to avoid entrapment.


If they Avoid " Entrappment " then explain how they get a teen
to cooperate in the first place.
Then of course,the Guys hiding in the bushes,just waiting to take
the legs out from under the Perv,as he quickly walks away.
Like a Fim crew isn't also entrappment.
Entrappment means,choreographed and plotted,beforehand.
Not Random.

the guy blew his brains out for good reason, he was a low life sack of shit that deserved to die. Anybody who is 40 and tries to seek out sex with a 12 year old - needs to have somebody blow his brains out. It's a lot easier if he does it himself. Whatever you might think - this is the God honest reality of the situation - the guy needed a bullet in the head. There is only one valid way to deal with child molesters and it simply is a bullet in their head. Shame the state doesn't subscribe to that - so we are reliant on NBC to ensure these shit bags shoot themselves.

Bravo to NBC - they should get an award not a lawsuit. In fact just because his family have the gaul to file suit - they should take away every single thing the family own and give it to NBC shareholders. These molesters have a strong urge to molest - so there needs to be a strong & harsh punishment to even stand a chance to deter their sicko minds.

There are people who watch this show and are STILL dumb enough to go out and try it. I say load them all up onto boats and sink each one in the middle of the arctic. The world has no place for dumbasses like this.

If they Avoid " Entrappment " then explain how they get a teen
to cooperate in the first place.
Then of course,the Guys hiding in the bushes,just waiting to take
the legs out from under the Perv,as he quickly walks away.
Like a Fim crew isn't also entrappment.
Entrappment means,choreographed and plotted,beforehand.
Not Random.

Entrapment: The act of luring one into performing a previously or otherwise uncontemplated illegal act.

1. The teenager is really 18, but pretends to be 13.
2. They dont just IM guys saying, "Hi I'm a horny 13 year old. Why dont you come over to my house?" These perverts have to initiate everything, the actor just agrees to the suggestions.

It always amazes me to see perfectly rational people who are willing to toss aside our criminal justice system because they are outraged by a particular crime. The question of someone's guilt or innocence when accused of any crime should be decided in a court of law, not on national television.

Great post, Vile.

the guy blew his brains out for good reason, he was a low life sack of shit that deserved to die. Anybody who is 40 and tries to seek out sex with a 12 year old - needs to have somebody blow his brains out. It's a lot easier if he does it himself. Whatever you might think - this is the God honest reality of the situation - the guy needed a bullet in the head. There is only one valid way to deal with child molesters and it simply is a bullet in their head. Shame the state doesn't subscribe to that - so we are reliant on NBC to ensure these shit bags shoot themselves.

Bravo to NBC - they should get an award not a lawsuit. In fact just because his family have the gaul to file suit - they should take away every single thing the family own and give it to NBC shareholders. These molesters have a strong urge to molest - so there needs to be a strong & harsh punishment to even stand a chance to deter their sicko minds.

I agree, Drew. The guy who blew his brains out was an ATTORNEY, so he no doubt knew how bad he'd screwed up and chose not to face justice. The fact that his family filed SUIT should also come as no surprise, considering his profession.

Not much difference, IMO, between this type of 'reality' TV and shows like Cops or Cheaters or Video Justice. Easy enough to avoid being embarrassed in front of your friends and family... just don't do the deed.

SMW

Some people seem to be forgetting that the man is an 'alleged' pedophile. It is 'alleged' that he communicated inappropriately with someone he thought was a young child. It is 'alleged' that he was not illegally entrapped. It is 'alleged' that he was going to go beyond talk and into inappropriate action.


What ever happened to the presumption of innocence that underpins our judicial system? What ever happened to the rights of the accused? What ever happened to trial by jury?

Pedophilia and sexual predation are crimes so heinous that the mere accusation is enough to ruin a person's life forever. Even if later found innocent of the crime the mere accusation has the power to destroy a person's life and the stigma left by the accusation never leaves. This fact can be seen by the response of certain posters in Allforums. The man was never found guilty of any crime yet there are those posting here who are applauding his death because he was such a horrid human being. They have decided he is a horrid human being not because he was legally tried and found to be so but because an accusation was made.

By televising the arrests of these 'accussed' persons NBC is declaring them guilty in the eyes of much of the viewing public. This is a perversion of our legal system.

NBC should be ashamed of using tragedy for ratings. Law enforcement should be ashamed of using a media circus as a legal strategy and some posters here should be ashamed of automatically assuming a person is guilty simply because he is accused.

Pedophilia and sexual predation are crimes so heinous that the mere accusation is enough to ruin a person's life forever. .



Which is why this accusation arises so often during custody battles.

Great post Frogger.

No offense, Frogger... but the guy who blew his brains out was obviously ashamed of his own actions. I think it would be VERY DIFFICULT, if not impossible to catch a predator who's also a lawyer and an asst district atty without some sort of 'string' operation. After all, it's hard to pin down someone who supposedly knows all the ways to get around the law.

NBC isn't the one commiting crimes here. The men who show up at what they think is a 12-yr old girl's house with their (proverbial) pants down around their knees are the perps. If they didn't show up... they'd never be implicated.

SMW

No offense, Frogger... but the guy who blew his brains out was obviously ashamed of his own actions.


You are once again assuming, Smartmouthwoman. First you assumed he was guilty because NBC said he was guilty and now you are assuming he killed himself because he was ashamed of his guilt.

It is just as plausable that he realized that because of the accusation his life was now ruined. He would forever be branded a pedophile and sexual predator, his friends would no longer want anything to do with him, his family would desert him, his job would be lost, his life would be ruined.

These things would have happened no matter what the final verdict. He was accused of being a pedophilic sexual predator on national television and people like you would automatically assume he was guilty.

I don't assume he was guilty because he was on TV, Frogger. I assume he was guilty because he blew his brains out.

Big difference.

Let's not forget the man was a prosecutor.
This fella knew criminal law forwards and backwards.
There is a distinct possibility that the man was working a case totally unrelated to this NBC brouhaha.

I am willing to wait for more facts to come out before I pass judgement on this man.

Entrapment: The act of luring one into performing a previously or otherwise uncontemplated illegal act.

1. The teenager is really 18, but pretends to be 13.
2. They dont just IM guys saying, "Hi I'm a horny 13 year old. Why dont you come over to my house?" These perverts have to initiate everything, the actor just agrees to the suggestions.

Exactly.

You are once again assuming, Smartmouthwoman. First you assumed he was guilty because NBC said he was guilty and now you are assuming he killed himself because he was ashamed of his guilt.

It is just as plausable that he realized that because of the accusation his life was now ruined. He would forever be branded a pedophile and sexual predator, his friends would no longer want anything to do with him, his family would desert him, his job would be lost, his life would be ruined.

These things would have happened no matter what the final verdict. He was accused of being a pedophilic sexual predator on national television and people like you would automatically assume he was guilty.
This is the very reason I believe the measures taken to protect a victim's identity should be applied to the accused as well.

As for the man in question, it may appear at first look that he was pedophile and sexual predator. However, we don't know all the facts and his case never went to trial. We don't even know what he would have been charged with. We therefore have no basis to pass judgement on him.

Entrapment: The act of luring one into performing a previously or otherwise uncontemplated illegal act.

1. The teenager is really 18, but pretends to be 13.
2. They dont just IM guys saying, "Hi I'm a horny 13 year old. Why dont you come over to my house?" These perverts have to initiate everything, the actor just agrees to the suggestions.

I've watched the show,many times,only briefly {usually a few
minutes}.I think you're right.The actuall teen on Line is underage,then
the Sting uses a decoy of legal consent {18 yrs.}.
That would seem to cause some legal problems.
I still call it sheer Entrappment.
The Sting ENTICES the Predator with Sex,like a drug.
If you're demanding that is isn't entrapment,based soley
on who mentions things like age,sex or explicit sex FIRST,that
seems disingenuous,at best.The law is in effect Encouraging an
Unlawfull act to proceed.
I know who Originates the Act,is legal.
But it is morally wrong and highly unethical,therefore since
legality is done for the good of Society,for the law to engage
in what it asserts to prevent.

It always amazes me to see perfectly rational people who are willing to toss aside our criminal justice system because they are outraged by a particular crime. The question of someone's guilt or innocence when accused of any crime should be decided in a court of law, not on national television.

Vile baby you are kinda being vague here honey.

Who is tossing aside "our criminal justice system" because they are outraged?

No facts have yet been brought to the table. He is not going to trial because he blew his brains out. Is that a tragedy? Yes it is. He is a human being who took his life.

However, if one is a decent human being, one endeavours not to illicit behaviour that the rest of your kith, kin and society revile. Kith, kin and society will for the most part forgive ALMOST anything. Get sucked off on your knees in your office, have wild sex in an elevator with someone other than your wife. Hell have a 25 year string of affairs. People won't like it, they may judge it on some level but the majority of people will still have the opinion of live and let live. We all stray. We all make stupid decisions that we regret.


There's one thing you don't do though.......you do not touch a child. One does not even let one's thoughts stray to touching a child. One does not go on-line and troll for jail bait. One just does not put ones family, career, and very life on the line by doing such a thing. One does not spend time in a chat room making sexual overtures to babies. Unless of course one has a certain proclivity. And people who have that proclivity and then begin to act on it have crossed the line.

He showed up at the house of a minor. How did he know where to show up? And what's all this bullshit about entrapment.? He knew where to go and he knew what was there when he arrived. The rest becomes moot...to a degree.

Yes it is a questionable show. But like I said in my first post, unless you are a cave dweller people know the show/sting exists and STILL they do it. Who shows up at a minor's house? A minor they have met on line and had sexual conversations with?

Some of these guys have been doctors, lawyers, rabbis, gym teachers.

So you guys that are screaming entrapment give your head a shake. Ask yourself if your little daughter's doctor, youth minister, gym teacher is trolling on line living out his supposed innocent sexual fantacies. See if you don't wonder about whose hands you are putting your child into. Respectable hands.........maybe, maybe not.

Obviously there are one hell of a lot of men out there that have a taste for young flesh. I think that indicates a problem we best begin to deal with. Even if supposed "entrapment" reveals such a pus underneath the surface of our clean little suburban lives. We best "deal".

I've watched the show,many times,only briefly {usually a few
minutes}.I think you're right.The actuall teen on Line is underage,then
the Sting uses a decoy of legal consent {18 yrs.}.
That would seem to cause some legal problems.
I still call it sheer Entrappment.
The Sting ENTICES the Predator with Sex,like a drug.
If you're demanding that is isn't entrapment,based soley
on who mentions things like age,sex or explicit sex FIRST,that
seems disingenuous,at best.The law is in effect Encouraging an
Unlawfull act to proceed.
I know who Originates the Act,is legal.
But it is morally wrong and highly unethical,therefore since
legality is done for the good of Society,for the law to engage
in what it asserts to prevent.
OK, so Fool... how do you feel about cops parking a 'sting car' in a neighborhood known to be a haven for car thieves? Is that entrapment??

I feel the same way about this subject as I do about placing security cameras in downtown areas... if you're not doing anything wrong, you don't need to worry about it.

SMW

Vile baby you are kinda being vague here honey.

Who is tossing aside "our criminal justice system" because they are outraged?

No facts have yet been brought to the table. He is not going to trial because he blew his brains out. Is that a tragedy? Yes it is. He is a human being who took his life.

However, if one is a decent human being, one endeavours not to illicit behaviour that the rest of your kith, kin and society revile. Kith, kin and society will for the most part forgive ALMOST anything. Get sucked off on your knees in your office, have wild sex in an elevator with someone other than your wife. Hell have a 25 year string of affairs. People won't like it, they may judge it on some level but the majority of people will still have the opinion of live and let live. We all stray. We all make stupid decisions that we regret.


There's one thing you don't do though.......you do not touch a child. One does not even let one's thoughts stray to touching a child. One does not go on-line and troll for jail bait. One just does not put ones family, career, and very life on the line by doing such a thing. One does not spend time in a chat room making sexual overtures to babies. Unless of course one has a certain proclivity. And people who have that proclivity and then begin to act on it have crossed the line.

He showed up at the house of a minor. How did he know where to show up? And what's all this bullshit about entrapment.? He knew where to go and he knew what was there when he arrived. The rest becomes moot...to a degree.

Yes it is a questionable show. But like I said in my first post, unless you are a cave dweller people know the show/sting exists and STILL they do it. Who shows up at a minor's house? A minor they have met on line and had sexual conversations with?

Some of these guys have been doctors, lawyers, rabbis, gym teachers.

So you guys that are screaming entrapment give your head a shake. Ask yourself if your little daughter's doctor, youth minister, gym teacher is trolling on line living out his supposed innocent sexual fantacies. See if you don't wonder about whose hands you are putting your child into. Respectable hands.........maybe, maybe not.

Obviously there are one hell of a lot of men out there that have a taste for young flesh. I think that indicates a problem we best begin to deal with. Even if supposed "entrapment" reveals such a pus underneath the surface of our clean little suburban lives. We best "deal".

Good post, Sal. I couldn't agree more.

;)
SMW

I've watched the show,many times,only briefly {usually a few
minutes}.I think you're right.The actuall teen on Line is underage,then
the Sting uses a decoy of legal consent {18 yrs.}.
That would seem to cause some legal problems.
I still call it sheer Entrappment.
The Sting ENTICES the Predator with Sex,like a drug.
If you're demanding that is isn't entrapment,based soley
on who mentions things like age,sex or explicit sex FIRST,that
seems disingenuous,at best.The law is in effect Encouraging an
Unlawfull act to proceed.
I know who Originates the Act,is legal.
But it is morally wrong and highly unethical,therefore since
legality is done for the good of Society,for the law to engage
in what it asserts to prevent.

No Foolie the actual teen on line is usually some big burly 40 year old detective. They scan the internet looking for vice. And this is one hell of a vice.

Have you watched the show long enough to listen to the dialogue these men have with this dectective? Because if you haven't you are making presumptions that are invalid. They talk about their penis size. The use their camera to show the pictures to the kids. They tell the kids how they are going to touch them and where.

So, please explain in precise english exactly what you mean. Drop your Spencer's foolery for a moment and be clear not funny and vague about what you mean exactly? How can you label this entrapment?

AND if it is entrapment.... let's give you that for a moment, how the hell does a decent human being get trapped into having an erotic conversation with a child. How exactly would that work?

It's kinda like the sting operations where guys get caught trying to have their wife offed. Does that get dismissed too. Is that entrapment when they meet a detective in the car and talk about how to carry out certain "freedom operations". That seems to hold up in a court of law just fine.

So explain..........why not this?

Good post, Sal. I couldn't agree more.

;)
SMW

I hope SMW that women who is suing hits an all woman jury........she won't see a penny.

I have a few questions. As you know, I've never watched this show.

What exactly did the "boy" say?
Was money mentioned?
Did he mention "working" for someone?

Did the prosecutor have a prior record of soliciting sex with minors? Bothering kids?
What was his standing in the community?
Did he do extensive work with kids? Like, too much work with kids??

Was he working a case thinking he was busting a kiddie porn ring?

There is a LOT we don't know.

I refuse to judge this man over the internet or via a few frames on tv.

I want to see transcripts. I want more evidence.

Vile baby you are kinda being vague here honey.

Who is tossing aside "our criminal justice system" because they are outraged?

No facts have yet been brought to the table. He is not going to trial because he blew his brains out. Is that a tragedy? Yes it is. He is a human being who took his life.

However, if one is a decent human being, one endeavours not to illicit behaviour that the rest of your kith, kin and society revile. Kith, kin and society will for the most part forgive ALMOST anything. Get sucked off on your knees in your office, have wild sex in an elevator with someone other than your wife. Hell have a 25 year string of affairs. People won't like it, they may judge it on some level but the majority of people will still have the opinion of live and let live. We all stray. We all make stupid decisions that we regret.


There's one thing you don't do though.......you do not touch a child. One does not even let one's thoughts stray to touching a child. One does not go on-line and troll for jail bait. One just does not put ones family, career, and very life on the line by doing such a thing. One does not spend time in a chat room making sexual overtures to babies. Unless of course one has a certain proclivity. And people who have that proclivity and then begin to act on it have crossed the line.

He showed up at the house of a minor. How did he know where to show up? And what's all this bullshit about entrapment.? He knew where to go and he knew what was there when he arrived. The rest becomes moot...to a degree.

Yes it is a questionable show. But like I said in my first post, unless you are a cave dweller people know the show/sting exists and STILL they do it. Who shows up at a minor's house? A minor they have met on line and had sexual conversations with?

Some of these guys have been doctors, lawyers, rabbis, gym teachers.

So you guys that are screaming entrapment give your head a shake. Ask yourself if your little daughter's doctor, youth minister, gym teacher is trolling on line living out his supposed innocent sexual fantacies. See if you don't wonder about whose hands you are putting your child into. Respectable hands.........maybe, maybe not.

Obviously there are one hell of a lot of men out there that have a taste for young flesh. I think that indicates a problem we best begin to deal with. Even if supposed "entrapment" reveals such a pus underneath the surface of our clean little suburban lives. We best "deal".

AMEN, Sister!!! Great post. What's amazing to me are those who feel sorry for the guy for being part of "entrapment". He trapped himself into the situation. He knew how to find these children from searching the internet for them. He just happened to find one that was going to bust him in the end. It's not any different than narcs who go undercover to bust drug rings. I think any man who has a young daughter or young son would be happy that these people are out there trying to stop these sickos. It's just a shame that it has come to this, that the law has to even look for these idiots.

BTW - good morning, everybody!

:)
Kimi

I have a few questions. As you know, I've never watched this show.

What exactly did the "girl" say?
Was money mentioned?
Did she mention "working" for someone?

Did the prosecutor have a prior record of soliciting sex with minors? Bothering kids?
What was his standing in the community?
Did he do extensive work with kids? Like, too much work with kids??

Was he working a case thinking he was busting a kiddie porn ring?

There is a LOT we don't know.

I refuse to judge this man over the internet or via a few frames on tv.

I want to see transcripts. I want more evidence.

Here's a partial transcript, Ren:

(chat transcript)

Whosurdaddynj: mmm, once were naked in bed we can do all kindsa stuff

Decoy: really? Wat kinda stuff?

Whosurdaddynj: rub our bodies together and feel how excited each other are.

Decoy: lol ya never gone allway before lol

Whosurdaddynj: ill make it nice for you.

The decoy asked "whosurdaddynj" to bring some pizza. He said he’d bring her favorite flavor: Supreme with pineapple.

For more info on how these cases actually came down... check out http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19838639/

I've done a bit of research today on Louis Conradt, former DA who shot himself and is accused of soliciting sex with a "13 year old " decoy posing as a young boy.

So far all I have found is he lived alone, and that the police were planning on seizing his home computer.

Can't find any of his transcripts from MSNBC as yet.

Vile baby you are kinda being vague here honey.

Who is tossing aside "our criminal justice system" because they are outraged?

No facts have yet been brought to the table. He is not going to trial because he blew his brains out. Is that a tragedy? Yes it is. He is a human being who took his life.

However, if one is a decent human being, one endeavours not to illicit behaviour that the rest of your kith, kin and society revile. Kith, kin and society will for the most part forgive ALMOST anything. Get sucked off on your knees in your office, have wild sex in an elevator with someone other than your wife. Hell have a 25 year string of affairs. People won't like it, they may judge it on some level but the majority of people will still have the opinion of live and let live. We all stray. We all make stupid decisions that we regret.


There's one thing you don't do though.......you do not touch a child. One does not even let one's thoughts stray to touching a child. One does not go on-line and troll for jail bait. One just does not put ones family, career, and very life on the line by doing such a thing. One does not spend time in a chat room making sexual overtures to babies. Unless of course one has a certain proclivity. And people who have that proclivity and then begin to act on it have crossed the line.

He showed up at the house of a minor. How did he know where to show up? And what's all this bullshit about entrapment.? He knew where to go and he knew what was there when he arrived. The rest becomes moot...to a degree.

Yes it is a questionable show. But like I said in my first post, unless you are a cave dweller people know the show/sting exists and STILL they do it. Who shows up at a minor's house? A minor they have met on line and had sexual conversations with?

Some of these guys have been doctors, lawyers, rabbis, gym teachers.

So you guys that are screaming entrapment give your head a shake. Ask yourself if your little daughter's doctor, youth minister, gym teacher is trolling on line living out his supposed innocent sexual fantacies. See if you don't wonder about whose hands you are putting your child into. Respectable hands.........maybe, maybe not.

Obviously there are one hell of a lot of men out there that have a taste for young flesh. I think that indicates a problem we best begin to deal with. Even if supposed "entrapment" reveals such a pus underneath the surface of our clean little suburban lives. We best "deal".

I have just one problem with your post and it is really rather minute but, you say there are a hell of a lot of men out there that have a taste for younfg flesh, which may be true, but there are a lot of women out there too. Let's give them some of the credit for depravity too. How many times have we seen the reports of a female teacher having sex with an underage student. You ladies are no better than us guys, we just have a worse reputation. But luckily you are catching up quickly. Equality rules !!

I hate to be one to defend sex offenders, but transcripts like that posted by smartmouth are not enough for me to wish death upon someone.

I've seen a lot more dangerous people getting a lot less severe treatment than these so-called sex "predators." A first time rapist (that's forced rape) will often only serve a few years in prison. They might get sentenced to 15, but good time and such will get them out in 5.

Personally, I think someone who forces someone to do something against their will is a far more serious offender than someone who tries to seduce a twelve year old over the internet. While our society is so focused on these desperate men, we're letting truly dangerous men out of jail in only a few years...and that's despite a recitivist rate of somewhere close to 70%.

Furthermore, if one of Dateline's "predators" targetted my daughter, I would probably be as angry with my daughter as the guy who tried to seduce her. Not to mention, I would be angry with myself for being a neglectful parent. My point is that there is some shared responsibility in these sort of crimes, and trying to lay it all on the guy on camera is overdoing it.

In addition, this talk also reminds me of a female friend of mine who became a ninth grade teacher. She would tell me how attractive some of her 14-year old male students were. You could claim my friend has problems, but she is a perfectly well-adjusted, law-abiding woman.

And if a perfectly well-adjusted woman can be attracted to a 14-year old, I'm fairly certain that a well-adjusted man can be attracted to a 12-year old (considering physical maturity disparities). I bet if I did a google search, I could find a dozen pictures of 12-year old girls that few men could honestly say they weren't attracted to. Where do you draw the line? Personally, I think people who target pre-pubescent children are the truly sick ones who deserve all of this "hang 'em high" talk.

And just to be clear, before I am targetted by the more self-righteous posters on this board, it's not that I think Dateline's "predators" are free of wrong-doing. I just think it should be treated less severely than many of the posters on this board indicate....I wish we spent some of this outrage on the fact that violent rapists can get out of prison in five years.

I've done a bit of research today on Louis Conradt, former DA who shot himself and is accused of soliciting sex with a "13 year old " decoy posing as a young boy.

So far all I have found is he lived alone, and that the police were planning on seizing his home computer.

Can't find any of his transcripts from MSNBC as yet.

I wonder if perhaps they have yanked everything off of the internet that they can find. Any potential evidence against either party has likely been seized.

I ....I wish we spent some of this outrage on the fact that violent rapists can get out of prison in five years.

or murderers.

2 cases off the top of my head, both local:

A. woman suffocates 2 year old at her day care center by placing leg with heavy cast on it while child is lying on matt.
Sentence--2 years probation.


B. man, age 17, kills elderly man and woman as they come home from church during armed robbery. While in prison, he kills another inmate.
Sentence for both crimes--less than 20 years. He was just released as a matter of fact. Gosh, let me bake him a cake.

I tend to agree with much of your post, leper. I think of what Jack Nicholson said in "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest"-----

"yes, 13 going on 30".

Make the punishment fit the crime.

I hate to be one to defend sex offenders, but transcripts like that posted by smartmouth are not enough for me to wish death upon someone.

I guess first we should clear up who wished any of these men DEAD? I must've missed that part.

Sal, mskimi and Smartmouthwoman seem to think that people who think the NBC program is wrong are somehow sympathetic to pedophiles and sexual molestors. That feeling shows how people accused of the above can not really get a fair trial, especially if they are first tried and convicted by the media.

Perhaps the DA was what he is accused of being, but then again, perhaps he was not. I have a big problem with the presumption of guilt I see being displayed by some posters. If he was guilty of the crime of which he was accused he should have been tried by the judicial system not the media.

There seems to be a lot of, his crime was so terrible he deserves to die without benefit of legal representation, thought around here. That is the same thinking that caused people to be killed by angry villagers who thought they were witches.

I have just one problem with your post and it is really rather minute but, you say there are a hell of a lot of men out there that have a taste for younfg flesh, which may be true, but there are a lot of women out there too. Let's give them some of the credit for depravity too. How many times have we seen the reports of a female teacher having sex with an underage student. You ladies are no better than us guys, we just have a worse reputation. But luckily you are catching up quickly. Equality rules !!

I fully agree with you. I've said it before....anybody, man or woman, who preys on children do not deserve any sympathy, whatsoever. JMHO

I've done a bit of research today on Louis Conradt, former DA who shot himself and is accused of soliciting sex with a "13 year old " decoy posing as a young boy.

So far all I have found is he lived alone, and that the police were planning on seizing his home computer.

Can't find any of his transcripts from MSNBC as yet.
Ren, I think you have to actually write to MSNBC to request specific transcripts (according to their website).

The only thing shown that I ran across were partial transcripts. Probably more of a business decision than an effort to protect anybody.

I have just one problem with your post and it is really rather minute but, you say there are a hell of a lot of men out there that have a taste for younfg flesh, which may be true, but there are a lot of women out there too. Let's give them some of the credit for depravity too. How many times have we seen the reports of a female teacher having sex with an underage student. You ladies are no better than us guys, we just have a worse reputation. But luckily you are catching up quickly. Equality rules !!

Genzo you have a valid point and I acknowledge that. I also won't change the direction of the thread because I would have to acknowledge that I have a double standard on the issue to a degree. But that would be a whole different thread.

So for now I will just say there are women out there that have sexual depravities and the numbers are likely growing. I am not sure why but we seem to have many sexual hangups in our society that perhaps contribute to the need for control over another.

Sal, mskimi and Smartmouthwoman seem to think that people who think the NBC program is wrong are somehow sympathetic to pedophiles and sexual molestors. That feeling shows how people accused of the above can not really get a fair trial, especially if they are first tried and convicted by the media.

Perhaps the DA was what he is accused of being, but then again, perhaps he was not. I have a big problem with the presumption of guilt I see being displayed by some posters. If he was guilty of the crime of which he was accused he should have been tried by the judicial system not the media.

There seems to be a lot of, his crime was so terrible he deserves to die without benefit of legal representation, thought around here. That is the same thinking that caused people to be killed by angry villagers who thought they were witches.

One question, Frogger. Did you see the show where the man in question was busted?

I never said anybody deserved to die over it, Frogger. The man killed himself, for whatever reason, and he took that reason to the grave with him. I'm talking about those who prey on children, period, men or women. He was busted for setting up a meeting with a child, in order to try and have sex with that child. If this were your daughter, would you feel any differently?

mskimi,

We are a nation of laws not vigilantism. What NBC and the police did was a clear case of acting as accuser, judge and jury. Out system does not work that way.

Our legal system operates under the presumption of innocence not the presumption of guilt. The man might well have been a sexual predator but that is for a jury to decide not NBC.

Ren, I think you have to actually write to MSNBC to request specific transcripts (according to their website).

The only thing shown that I ran across were partial transcripts. Probably more of a business decision than an effort to protect anybody.

ok--thanks--like Sal said, probably it's been pulled.

Genzo you have a valid point and I acknowledge that. I also won't change the direction of the thread because I would have to acknowledge that I have a double standard on the issue to a degree. But that would be a whole different thread.

So for now I will just say there are women out there that have sexual depravities and the numbers are likely growing. I am not sure why but we seem to have many sexual hangups in our society that perhaps contribute to the need for control over another.


Really not growing. They've stayed about the same throughout our society through the years.
The internet just makes it easier --for molesters to find victims, for the law to nab them.
But, as noted, the smarter ones don't use the internet.

Sal, mskimi and Smartmouthwoman seem to think that people who think the NBC program is wrong are somehow sympathetic to pedophiles and sexual molestors. That feeling shows how people accused of the above can not really get a fair trial, especially if they are first tried and convicted by the media.

Perhaps the DA was what he is accused of being, but then again, perhaps he was not. I have a big problem with the presumption of guilt I see being displayed by some posters. If he was guilty of the crime of which he was accused he should have been tried by the judicial system not the media.

There seems to be a lot of, his crime was so terrible he deserves to die without benefit of legal representation, thought around here. That is the same thinking that caused people to be killed by angry villagers who thought they were witches.

Frogger I hear what you are saying. It is a highly volatile topic.

Do I think the guy was guilty.... honestly, yeah I do. Do I think he is a worthless piece of offal that deserved to blow his head off. No Frogger I don't.

Yes he deserved a fair trial. He had parents who hopefully loved him and he leaves behind a terrible legacy for his family.


But his decision to off himself is not NBC's problem nor mine. It is a shame that this human being choose that way out. It is too bad he had a gun in his car when he panicked. There are many things here that are too bad under the circumstances. But to argue entrapment is a load of crap. It too defies fact.

It is likely the worst thing in the world to be accused of other than genocide or rape. Hell most of us would rather be accused of murder or even child batterment rather than that. For that reason, women who accuse men of such crimes in order to manipulate child custody etc should be punished etc. etc.

You have a big problem with people saying he was guilty but you didn't have the same problem when some guy blew another guy away on the word of a woman and their child. So it is all subjective. The evidence here is much stronger than the evidence you argued in favour of at the time.

I don't think anyone is saying we know for a certainty that he is guilty. But he damn sure looks it. If you took a poll here I am sure most if not all would say his death in reality was a tragedy and he deserved a fair trial.

If you asked me to lay odds though Frogger... he was caught red handed as surely as a child is when his hand is in the cookie jar and wrapped around that big fat oatmeal cookie.

Obviously there are one hell of a lot of men out there that have a taste for young flesh.
We all do - it's the "young" part that's up for debate here. They never look better than they do at 17 or 18. Unfortunately, 17 lands you in prison, and 18 is frowned upon. A lot of people say that "conversation" with an 18 year old is pointless, but trust me, most men don't care, for that's not what they're after. If they wanted a decent conversation, then they'd be talking to their broker.

Really not growing. They've stayed about the same throughout our society through the years.
The internet just makes it easier --for molesters to find victims, for the law to nab them.
But, as noted, the smarter ones don't use the internet.

Not growing... okay well that is good then...thanks for the info... guess as a human species we have certain tendencies within a percentage of the population... guess awareness sometimes leads one to think there is growth but that is not a valid assumption.

We all do - it's the "young" part that's up for debate here. They never look better than they do at 17 or 18. Unfortunately, 17 lands you in prison, and 18 is frowned upon. A lot of people say that "conversation" with an 18 year old is pointless, but trust me, most men don't care, for that's not what they're after. If they wanted a decent conversation, then they'd be talking to their broker.

lol.... yeah that's the gawd's honest truth...

Sal,

It is not a question of the man being guilty or innocent. It is a question of people being willing to suspend our legal system because they THINK he was guilty. It is a question of networks like NBC running programs in which they presume a person's guilt and televise that presumption as if it were truth. It is a question of taking away a person's right to a FAIR trial and not a trial by media.

The guy probably was a pedophile. Had it gone to trial there is a good chance he would have been convicted. That is not the problem though. The problem is the suspension of our legal system by an entertainment network aided and abetted by a local police force.

that's true--and in some societies, it's not a crime at all.
But a good and decent society protects the young and the helpless. I think we're all agreed on that.:)

The problem is the suspension of our legal system by an entertainment network aided and abetted by a local police force.
I agree with that assessment. "Entrapment"? No. Suspending the legal process for sweeps week in the public's mind's eye? Well, I have to say that is rather repugnant – sure.

that's true--and in some societies, it's not a crime at all.
But a good and decent society protects the young and the helpless. I think we're all agreed on that.:)

I don't think anyone is arguing that we should not protect our young boys and girls or that sexual predation is a horrible crime. What is being discussed is the methodology. There is something wrong with a person being accused and found guilty by an entertainment entity. This was not about protecting children. It was about gaining market share and gaining market share should not be the basis of our legal system.

We all do - it's the "young" part that's up for debate here. They never look better than they do at 17 or 18. Unfortunately, 17 lands you in prison, and 18 is frowned upon. A lot of people say that "conversation" with an 18 year old is pointless, but trust me, most men don't care, for that's not what they're after. If they wanted a decent conversation, then they'd be talking to their broker.

LOL, that's true, and the same could be said for women--I work the Indiana Sex Offender Database here where I work. Every month, I update the listings.
Every month, we see more and more women on this thing--depraved looking hags, by and large, but a few are attractive. They like their boys young--like around pre-teen.

Maybe they talk about gaming.:eek:

[QUOTE=Frogger] There is something wrong with a person being accused and found guilty by an entertainment entity. /QUOTE]

And there always has been. That doesn't stop them, tho..see Lindbergh case, Duke lacrosse team, etc etc etc.

I've done a bit of research today on Louis Conradt, former DA who shot himself and is accused of soliciting sex with a "13 year old " decoy posing as a young boy.

So far all I have found is he lived alone, and that the police were planning on seizing his home computer.

Can't find any of his transcripts from MSNBC as yet.

Ren, here's some further info about Louis Conradt. Although I still think men who actually show up at what they think is a minor's home for what they think will be a sexual encounter should be busted... I have to admit, it looks like Conradt never went that far. Which makes it REALLY too bad that he chose to kill himself. Appears he might've had a good case for dismissal since that particular episode's cases never went to court in the first place due to the aforementioned problems with jurisdiction. (Guess the information found on his computer will provide a more in-depth look into whatever he thought was so terrible, he put a gun to his head.)

So, I'm gonna re-state my views about this subject to include a point about the police's ability to bust someone for simply talking on the phone. I DO NOT THINK that is fair. However, having said that... obviously those in authority disagree.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17265956/

(scan thru the pics)

SMW

They like their boys young--like around pre-teen.

Maybe they talk about gaming.:eek:
Yikes! That's a really odd thing for women to be doing. Unless, of course, they're into gaming and DND. Oh, and sex, too, I guess. ;)

mskimi,

We are a nation of laws not vigilantism. What NBC and the police did was a clear case of acting as accuser, judge and jury. Out system does not work that way.

Our legal system operates under the presumption of innocence not the presumption of guilt. The man might well have been a sexual predator but that is for a jury to decide not NBC.

They didn't convict him. They brought his activities out in to the open, like they have done with hundreds of men who prey on children. I don't like the media and all the power they seem to have any more than you do, but I think they have brought a serious problem to the forefront, and for that I commend them. Like you, I believe he would have deserved a trial, had he not decided to kill himself. I don't disagree with you about the legal system. I simply do not have any sympathy for anybody who searches out young victims to try and have sex with them, as he was clearly trying to do.

There is something wrong with a person being accused and found guilty by an entertainment entity. This was not about protecting children. It was about gaining market share and gaining market share should not be the basis of our legal system.

You mean like in the Scopes trial - 1925; the Lindberg Kidnapping trial - 1932; the OJ Simpson trial - 1995, and all those in between and since.

Yikes! That's a really odd thing for women to be doing. Unless, of course, they're into gaming and DND. Oh, and sex, too, I guess. ;)

Hey! DND is a great game :)

Yikes! That's a really odd thing for women to be doing. Unless, of course, they're into gaming and DND. Oh, and sex, too, I guess. ;)
They don't need to go to little boys for that... I've got a 22 year old who's VERY into gaming. Not so much D&D anymore since he doesn't have time for it, but he still likes it... :lolhit: