Ex RTÉ producer sentenced to 18 months in prison

AllForIt

Jim Bob Scratcher wrote: »

Did anyone see the interview last night on the Pat Kenny show? It seems that anyone who questions these vigilante's methods is a paedophile sympathizer which is absolutely ridiculous. If they really cared or are serious about protecting children why don't they just hand the evidence over to the police without broadcasting it live all over facebook?

Just caught up with it online. Ian O' Doherty totally annihilated Phil I though. Ian hammered home the point quite rightly that if we were were to accept these groups then we are saying we are okay with vigilantism and inferred its then acceptable in relation to all crimes. Where would we be then.

It was rather comical I though that after Phil explained how their group do things in a processional manner that he then proceeded to loose the rag with Ian to the point it looked like it might come to fisticuffs. I'm not particularly convinced that Phil is capable of keeping his cool when on the job.

Ian cleverly made sure to bring up the point about Phil concealing his full name. It wouldn't surprise me if we had his full name a goggle search might reveal some not so flattering facts about Mr Phil such as a court appearance perhaps. It makes me wonder how many of these guys in all the groups who say they gave up work to peruse a career in saving children actually have very poor employment prospects due to say a criminal record. I just can't stop wondering what all that face mask thing is about. You'd think they wan't to be recognized on the street no?

I didn't realise there were as many as 77 separate attacks by these groups in NI in the last 2 years, as Ian said. Even more interesting is that with figures like that there has been precious little news or comment about those facts from either the PNSI or any politician, that I have heard.

end of the road wrote: »

i never thought of that possibility. who would be putting them up to it and supporting them i wonder?

I have a theory about that that I won't go into too much now suffice to say I have noticed that when it comes to crimes that involve the use of computers the British police seem to be all over it but when computers are not particularly involved as in the Telford case they don't seem to be so quite on the ball.

Btw I loved Phills hoody. It looked like one of those college hoddies - perhaps he's done a conversion course in predator catching.

Jim Bob Scratcher

AllForIt wrote: »

Just caught up with it online. Ian O' Doherty totally annihilated Phil I though. Ian hammered home the point quite rightly that if we were were to accept these groups then we are saying we are okay with vigilantism and inferred its then acceptable in relation to all crimes. Where would we be then.

It was rather comical I though that after Phil explained how their group do things in a processional manner that he then proceeded to loose the rag with Ian to the point it looked like it might come to fisticuffs. I'm not particularly convinced that Phil is capable of keeping his cool when on the job.

Ian cleverly made sure to bring up the point about Phil concealing his full name. It wouldn't surprise me if we had his full name a goggle search might reveal some not so flattering facts about Mr Phil such as a court appearance perhaps. It makes me wonder how many of these guys in all the groups who say they gave up work to peruse a career in saving children actually have very poor employment prospects due to say a criminal record. I just can't stop wondering what all that face mask thing is about. You'd think they wan't to be recognized on the street no?

I didn't realise there were as many as 77 separate attacks by these groups in NI in the last 2 years, as Ian said. Even more interesting is that with figures like that there has been precious little news or comment about those facts from either the PNSI or any politician, that I have heard.




I have a theory about that that I won't go into too much now suffice to say I have noticed that when it comes to crimes that involve the use of computers the British police seem to be all over it but when computers are not particularly involved as in the Telford case they don't seem to be so quite on the ball.

Btw I loved Phills hoody. It looked like one of those college hoddies - perhaps he's done a conversion course in predator catching.

I think yer man Phil did some porridge for armed robbery, but he is an upstanding citizen now :rolleyes:

wakka12

McCrack wrote: »

Unfortunately the reality is by the time evidence comes to light by the police the sexual abuse has already occured.

By its very nature the abuse will only come to police attention after it has been committed.

The pedo hunters identify and expose potential threats before they have the opportunity to carry out their abuse.

And as I said in another post the guys these justice league catch are not the dangerous predators that are cunning and intelligent and successfully manipulate children and young teenagers. They are usually brain dead old fellas on okcupid who didn't even intend to meet children when they went on an 18+ dating website
Most of these men are not even intelligent enough to lure or trick a 13 year old girl into meeting them
https://www.thesun.co.uk/video/news/vigilante-group-silent-justice-collaring-suspected-irish-paedophile-in-naas/
This...is just pathetic to watch. Do you think this man was actually a danger to society? I honestly do not think he is

These guys are not improving the world at all. The police are doing the good work, not these lot
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5407931/Depraved-paedophile-used-blackmail-target-victims.html
These are the dangerous people, and its why the police work is left to the police, competent and trained professionals

Red_Wake

Dr Brown wrote: »

McCrack wrote: »

I applaud what they do.

Police generally react after the damage is done.

Pedo hunters identify and expose these predators before the damage is done. Their actions as ive explained previously are perfectly lawful.

The RTE man is a great catch and one to be applauded by any right thinking person.

Without the pedo hunters that scumbag from RTE would be still out there free to abuse kids.

You can question their methods but you can't question their results.

I know they get results, but in this department we do things by the book!

Strazdas

McCrack wrote: »

I applaud what they do.

Police generally react after the damage is done.

Pedo hunters identify and expose these predators before the damage is done. Their actions as ive explained previously are perfectly lawful.

The RTE man is a great catch and one to be applauded by any right thinking person.

Their actions are certainly not lawful. What happens if they "detain" an innocent man on the street and live stream the whole thing on Facebook. That would be 100% criminal and illegal.

Flippyfloppy

Strazdas wrote: »

Their actions are certainly not lawful. What happens if they "detain" an innocent man on the street and live stream the whole thing on Facebook. That would be 100% criminal and illegal.

There’s been so many videos live streamed and I haven’t heard of one person arrested over the act of live-streaming it?

Strazdas

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

There’s been so many videos live streamed and I haven’t heard of one person arrested over the act of live-streaming it?

That might happen in future, who knows? If the Gardai warn these groups to desist from their activities (as has happened in NI) and they carry on regardless, we could end up seeing prosecutions and the vigilantes before the courts.

McCrack

Strazdas wrote: »

Their actions are certainly not lawful. What happens if they "detain" an innocent man on the street and live stream the whole thing on Facebook. That would be 100% criminal and illegal.

That argument is predicated only on the assumption that the target was "innocent"

I am simply stating that they have a power of arrest in circumstance where an arrestable offence is committed and as I have pointed out use of information and communication technology to facilitate sexual exploitation of child (grooming) is an arrestable offence.

You had previously stated that their actions were unlawful and that they did not have the power to detain which is just not correct.

ohnonotgmail

Strazdas wrote: »

That might happen in future, who knows? If the Gardai warn these groups to desist from their activities (as has happened in NI) and they carry on regardless, we could end up seeing prosecutions and the vigilantes before the courts.

On what grounds? What powers do the gardai have to tell people to desist from lawful activities?

Strazdas

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

On what grounds? What powers do the gardai have to tell people to desist from lawful activities?

Three self styled vigilante group leaders were charged last week in Belfast with false imprisonment, intimidation and harassment in relation to such 'exposure' cases.

You are supposed to hand any evidence you have of criminal activity over to the police and allow them proceed accordingly : you are not supposed to be detaining people on the street and carrying out arrests yourself.

McCrack

Strazdas wrote: »

Three self styled vigilante group leaders were charged last week in Belfast with false imprisonment, intimidation and harassment in relation to such 'exposure' cases.

You are supposed to hand any evidence you have of criminal activity over to the police and allow them proceed accordingly : you are not supposed to be detaining people on the street and carrying out arrests yourself.

But do you not understand/accept that the law provides that a person that is not a police officer can in fact lawfully detain/arrest another person on the street where that person has committed an arrestable offence - in this case grooming a child for the intention of committng sexual abuse/rape?

ohnonotgmail

Strazdas wrote: »

Three self styled vigilante group leaders were charged last week in Belfast with false imprisonment, intimidation and harassment in relation to such 'exposure' cases.

You are supposed to hand any evidence you have of criminal activity over to the police and allow them proceed accordingly : you are not supposed to be detaining people on the street and carrying out arrests yourself.

perhaps the PSNI were pissed off that these groups are doing a job they should be doing.

buried

The vigilante groups just set a bad precedent. I can understand the frustration some of these people can feel with how poor the actual justice system handles these things, people see the whole Justice thing as nothing but a money making market at the courthouse with nothing but roundabout lenient sentencing from the courts so decide to take matters in to their own hands. But where do those hands stop? What are the rules? How do you stop it from becoming endemic from it being a famous live facebook feed showcase to everyone else? After this story broke I heard a few local young farmers down my local pub one night going on about how they should they set up something similar to catch the gangs of thieves they feel are terrorising their community, I doubt they meant it, maybe they did, still, It did not sound good. And it doesn't. I can understand their own frustrations too, but that sort of game can get easily out of control when your only rule or regulation for existing as a vigilante is that you are pissed off or really afraid. In that mindset you are liable to do anything to anyone because your hunt style justice is based on nothing but fear and panic. Not good.

end of the road

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

perhaps the PSNI were pissed off that these groups are doing a job they should be doing.

not at all. the PSNI simply did their job because that is what they are paid for, and is what they are supposed to do.

ohnonotgmail

end of the road wrote: »

not at all. the PSNI simply did their job because that is what they are paid for, and is what they are supposed to do.

clearly that job doesn't include catching sexual predators.

end of the road

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

clearly that job doesn't include catching sexual predators.

it does. and they should be given the funding and resources to do it properly.

not sure if the guards are any better in terms of protection. They used their very power to slander maurice mcCabe in the worst possible way, calling him a PAEDO . And this came from the top, by all accounts.

On the argument, as to if it's it's "credible" to arrest once the child is fictional, what's the difference between someone posing as a child on line and an undercover cop posing as a gun runner, drug dealer, dirtbag to gain confidence and elicit a suspected criminal activity for the purpose of preventing future crimes?? It's interesting but I think it holds up.

I just agree that phil, who couldn't string a sentence together unless it was a 12 month one.......was a bad poster boy..He could have caught that ****wit O' Doherty out easily if he stayed calm and was clever.

Strazdas

McCrack wrote: »

But do you not understand/accept that the law provides that a person that is not a police officer can in fact lawfully detain/arrest another person on the street where that person has committed an arrestable offence - in this case grooming a child for the intention of committng sexual abuse/rape?

I could decide that you have committed an offence and me and eight of my mates "detain" you on the street tomorrow for an hour (whist streaming the whole thing live on Facebook). Where does it all end? There's supposed to be only legitimate police force and if you have evidence of a crime, you're meant to give it to them so that they can decide what to do with it.

You as a private citizen are not supposed to be making decisions for them about what is unlawful and who needs to be arrested : that's meant to be solely a matter for the police and the courts, otherwise you're trying to set yourself up as a private police force.

Flippyfloppy

Strazdas wrote: »

I could decide that you have committed an offence and me and eight of my mates "detain" you on the street tomorrow for an hour (whist streaming the whole thing live on Facebook). Where does it all end? There's supposed to be only legitimate police force and if you have evidence of a crime, you're meant to give it to them so that they can decide what to do with it.

You as a private citizen are not supposed to be making decisions for them about what is unlawful and who needs to be arrested : that's meant to be solely a matter for the police and the courts, otherwise you're trying to set yourself up as a private police force.

Will it ever get that far? Apart from the usual traditional vigilante groups that have existed for a long time, and will continue to do so as long as people feel afraid and unprotected.

Will people try and detain people in this way for different offenses? I can’t see that happening because people are extremely frustrated with the lack of policing around sexual predators on the internet, as well as lenient (suspended) sentences handed down for the most horrifying of crimes. I just don’t see any other crimes that people will be bothered putting in the organisation, time and effort that goes into these paedophile hunting groups.

weldoninhio

Strazdas wrote: »

Three self styled vigilante group leaders were charged last week in Belfast with false imprisonment, intimidation and harassment in relation to such 'exposure' cases.

You are supposed to hand any evidence you have of criminal activity over to the police and allow them proceed accordingly : you are not supposed to be detaining people on the street and carrying out arrests yourself.

You do know Belfast and Dublin, hell even Dundalk, are completely different jurisdictions with completely different laws??

weldoninhio

Also, vigilante infers taking the law into their own hands. These people do not, they aggregate evidence, snare the scum and normally have called the police before they confront and detain them.

end of the road

weldoninhio wrote: »

Also, vigilante infers taking the law into their own hands. These people do not, they aggregate evidence, snare the scum and normally have called the police before they confront and detain them.

ergo they take the law into their own hands, ergo vigilante is what they them only doing it in part doesn't ultimately change what they are.

Strazdas

weldoninhio wrote: »

Also, vigilante infers taking the law into their own hands. These people do not, they aggregate evidence, snare the scum and normally have called the police before they confront and detain them.

What gives them the right to 'confront and detain' anyone? The person they are confronting could be completely innocent, meaning the group are harassing and intimidating them.

These individuals are not the police and are not operating with the permission or approval of the Gardai. A citizen's arrest is meant to be something that happens once in your lifetime. If you are doing it regularly, it means you have set yourself up as a professional vigilante.

weldoninhio

Strazdas wrote: »

What gives them the right to 'confront and detain' anyone? The person they are confronting could be completely innocent, meaning the group are harassing and intimidating them.

These individuals are not the police and are not operating with the permission or approval of the Gardai. A citizen's arrest is meant to be something that happens once in your lifetime. If you are doing it regularly, it means you have set yourself up as a professional vigilante.

The LAW gives people the right to confront and detain someone for an arrestable offence. Could you point me in the direction of the act that states that a citizens arrest is a once in a lifetime thing??

wakka12

weldoninhio wrote: »

The LAW gives people the right to confront and detain someone for an arrestable offence. Could you point me in the direction of the act that states that a citizens arrest is a once in a lifetime thing??

If they want to arrest people then they join the police force. They shouldn't be doing this and theres no excuse for vigilanteism

McCrack

wakka12 wrote: »

If they want to arrest people then they join the police force. They shouldn't be doing this and theres no excuse for vigilanteism

I think you need to look up the definition of what a vigilante actually is

Groups that exposure child sexual abusers are perfectly entitled to do what they do because the law entitles them to do it

weldoninhio

wakka12 wrote: »

If they want to arrest people then they join the police force. They shouldn't be doing this and theres no excuse for vigilanteism

LEGALLY detaining someone is vigilantism now?? Any sign of that once in a lifetime citizens arrest rule yet??

Strazdas

weldoninhio wrote: »

LEGALLY detaining someone is vigilantism now?? Any sign of that once in a lifetime citizens arrest rule yet??

Do you know how many people have been charged in the ROI and NI after one of these "citizen's arrest" by vigilante groups? I can give you the precise figure : zero (meaning they are completely wasting police time and resources).

McCrack

Strazdas wrote: »

Do you know how many people have been charged in the ROI and NI after one of these "citizen's arrest" by vigilante groups? I can give you the precise figure : zero (meaning they are completely wasting police time and resources).

You do understand that it can takes many months for the PPS/DPP to prefer charges?

There are many examples in the UK of child abusers being brought before the courts because of the good work being voluntarily done by these groups. Our own RTE man sure.

And ive no doubt either that the publicity that these arrests generate has deterred other abusers from trying to groom children online for their own perverse enjoyment

weldoninhio

Strazdas wrote: »

Do you know how many people have been charged in the ROI and NI after one of these "citizen's arrest" by vigilante groups? I can give you the precise figure : zero (meaning they are completely wasting police time and resources).

That’s terrible. Gardai should be thankful for the help. These concerned citizens aren’t breaking any laws by detaining paedos. How many have been charged with “wasting police time” (which is illegal and chargeable) in NI or ROI??

end of the road

McCrack wrote: »

There are many examples in the UK of child abusers being brought before the courts because of the good work being voluntarily done by these groups. Our own RTE man sure.

no, it's because the police have enough evidence once they do further investigations. the groups have effectively a non-part to play in this, only handing some evidence for which the police do the actual work.

McCrack wrote: »

And ive no doubt either that the publicity that these arrests generate has deterred other abusers from trying to groom children online for their own perverse enjoyment

i'd very much doubt it. they can go elsewhere online where they are less likely to be caught. i'd suggest this is more wishful thinking rather then reality.

weldoninhio wrote: »

That’s terrible. Gardai should be thankful for the help. These concerned citizens aren’t breaking any laws by detaining paedos. How many have been charged with “wasting police time” (which is illegal and chargeable) in NI or ROI??

thankfully, gardai are not thankful for the "help" of untrained non-concerned citizens with to much time on their hands and who really, get in the way of the gardai's work.

Dr Brown

Strazdas wrote: »

Do you know how many people have been charged in the ROI and NI after one of these "citizen's arrest" by vigilante groups? I can give you the precise figure : zero (meaning they are completely wasting police time and resources).

Even if they not charged at least they are exposed to the public.

Most people would want to know if there was a sex beast living in their area.

Strazdas

Dr Brown wrote: »

Even if they not charged at least they are exposed to the public.

Most people would want to know if there was a sex beast living in their area.

In truth, I've a feeling these groups couldn't care less whether the person is charged or not by the police or ever brought to court. It seems to be all about naming and shaming the suspect perverts and streaming it live on Facebook.

The danger here of course is that they could target innocent people, or one of these confrontations could spiral out of control and see someone seriously injured or killed.

Galwayguy35

This Phil guy who was interviewed the other night is a hero.

Paedos should just do the decent thing and kill themselves.

Schwanz

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Paedos should just do the decent thing and kill themselves.

First they should seek help, then if that fails - for me they deserve a death penalty if they do something sicko.


How something so evil can rock their boats is beyond me.

Galwayguy35

Schwanz wrote: »

First they should seek help, then if that fails - for me they deserve a death penalty if they do something sicko.


How something so evil can rock their boats is beyond me.

There was a programme on channel 4 a few years ago where they interviewed one of them.

I nearly vomited listening to him talking.

ohnonotgmail

Strazdas wrote: »

In truth, I've a feeling these groups couldn't care less whether the person is charged or not by the police or ever brought to court. It seems to be all about naming and shaming the suspect perverts and streaming it live on Facebook.

The danger here of course is that they could target innocent people, or one of these confrontations could spiral out of control and see someone seriously injured or killed.

They wait for people to make contact with their decoys so how can they be targeting anybody?

Mickey Mike

Moving away from phoefiles and under age sex, you could see these groups widen our, the men who pay prostitutes for sex is now a crime on the island of Ireland, people will be named and shamed, a big fine and maybe a term in jail. Its so easy to catch men in this way, just wait outside of a building and wait for the catch.
We all better keep It in our underpants.

Dr Brown

Mickey Mike wrote: »

Moving away from phoefiles and under age sex, you could see these groups widen our, the men who pay prostitutes for sex is now a crime on the island of Ireland, people will be named and shamed, a big fine and maybe a term in jail. Its so easy to catch men in this way, just wait outside of a building and wait for the catch.
We all better keep It in our underpants.

Nobody cares what consenting adults do amongst themselves.

end of the road

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

This Phil guy who was interviewed the other night is a hero.

the police and prosecutors are the heroes. they actually get the cases to court.

Dr Brown

end of the road wrote: »

the police and prosecutors are the heroes. they actually get the cases to court.

Are you talking about the same Police in the UK who turned a blind eye to the mass rape of English girls by Pakistan gangs ?

end of the road

Dr Brown wrote: »

Are you talking about the same Police in the UK who turned a blind eye to the mass rape of English girls by Pakistan gangs ?

not all police officers across the uk will be responsible for that. those who are should be jailed indefinitely.

Dr Brown

end of the road wrote: »

not all police officers across the uk will be responsible for that. those who are should be jailed indefinitely.

It shows that the Police in the UK are not up to the job of protecting children.

Dr Brown

Nazi Collaborator wrote: »

There is a disturbing trend in the left wing media to downplay or even normalise pedophilia.

So does Hollywood.

I only recently found out that the Indiana Jones character is a Paedophile.

Galwayguy35

end of the road wrote: »

the police and prosecutors are the heroes. they actually get the cases to court.

Craven wasn't even on the cops radar, in other words they knew nothing about him so if it was up to them there wouldn't be a case to bring to court.

Explain that one to me whenever you're ready.

McCrack

Some people around here think these exposure groups are usurping the role and function of the police when that is not so.

Another poster refers to them as "vigilantes" and when one actually looks up the precise definition of what a vigilante actually is we see that they could not possibly be when they are acting within the law and Ive referenced the legislation previously for this jurisdiction.

The reality is these exposure groups are most certainly acting with lawful authority. When they have enough evidence and identify their target they make an arrest. They then call the police and hand the target over to police custody.

The police then commence their investigation and submit a file to the prosecuting authority. A court appearance will follow with due process.

Its no different to a retail security officer witnessing a theft (being an arrestable offence), following the person out of the shop, stopping them outside, arresting them and calling the police. Same idea, no usurption of the police function.

Demonique

18mths is a slap on the wrist for this sort of thing though IMO

McCrack

I think the court got it right in a situation where there was no previous convictions and no actual contact with a child

I think the public outing and disgust, losing his job and I suspect his marriage will far outweigh any loss of liberty punishment

And good enough for him

weldoninhio

McCrack wrote: »

I think the court got it right in a situation where there was no previous convictions and no actual contact with a child

I think the public outing and disgust, losing his job and I suspect his marriage will far outweigh any loss of liberty punishment

And good enough for him

No actual contact with a child in this instance. Who knows how many he fiddled previously. His FB profile showed he’d travelled to a lot of known paedo-tourism places. 18 months is a slap on the wrist.

Omackeral

McCrack wrote: »

I think the court got it right in a situation where there was no previous convictions and no actual contact with a child

I think the public outing and disgust, losing his job and I suspect his marriage will far outweigh any loss of liberty punishment

And good enough for him

I'd agree with this post. You can't punish on the grounds he's been to certain countries so may have done this or that. Anyway, his life is fcuked on these shores. You can see the toll it's taken on him physically. Good enough for the vile POS.