Gardai cricitise paedophile hunters

Discodog

She was given 30 mins of virtually unopposed publicity on Liveline.

Dyr

cgcsb wrote: »

I've heard they've also turned up to wrong addresses before and even cornered the room-mates of the person they are looking for.

The types of guys that they are catching must be the dimest sex offenders going like surely you would be more careful if you were in any way serious about it.

Cos that's the problem with Kiddie Fiddlers these days, too many dabblers

pah

Haven't read the whole thread as 40 pgs long. It's probably been said already but I think govt should look at taking on these "hunters" provide then with specialist training and have them attached to a dedicated Garda unit providing an intelligence function.

If the law doesn't quite work in relation to this, entrapment fears etc - just change it.

MrStuffins

pah wrote: »

Haven't read the whole thread as 40 pgs long. It's probably been said already but I think govt should look at taking on these "hunters" provide then with specialist training and have them attached to a dedicated Garda unit providing an intelligence function.

Horrible idea!

cgcsb

pah wrote: »

Haven't read the whole thread as 40 pgs long. It's probably been said already but I think govt should look at taking on these "hunters" provide then with specialist training and have them attached to a dedicated Garda unit providing an intelligence function.

If the law doesn't quite work in relation to this, entrapment fears etc - just change it.

They probably get more extortion money + dole money than the Gardaí could ever offer them.

weldoninhio

MrStuffins wrote: »

Horrible idea!

You seem very against nonces getting caught. Vested interest???

TheValeyard

pah wrote: »

Haven't read the whole thread as 40 pgs long. It's probably been said already but I think govt should look at taking on these "hunters" provide then with specialist training and have them attached to a dedicated Garda unit providing an intelligence function.

If the law doesn't quite work in relation to this, entrapment fears etc - just change it.

Already is a dedicated Garda unit. It should be expanded though. They already have links and work with international agencies which is probably better at achieving a legal outcome rather than these vigilantes. Firmly believe trained specialist gardai should be handling this and not individual gangs.

Feisar

weldoninhio wrote: »

You seem very against nonces getting caught. Vested interest???

A very disingenuous statement. Just because the poster doesn't want egits to be given some sort of legitimacy does not imply anything of the sort that you have suggested.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

weldoninhio wrote: »

You seem very against nonces getting caught. Vested interest???

Did you just make a veiled accusation of pedophilia against someone for the sole reason they disagreed with you...?

Not for the first time: it IS possible to see this as a bad idea and to see serious consequences WITHOUT actually being on the side of the pedophiles.

weldoninhio

Feisar wrote: »

A very disingenuous statement. Just because the poster doesn't want egits to be given some sort of legitimacy does not imply anything of the sort that you have suggested.

If they were to be working with the Gardai they would be fully vetted and have strict legal protocols. Yet some are still against this happening. I wonder why??

Buford T. Justice XIX

weldoninhio wrote: »

You seem very against nonces getting caught. Vested interest???

Mod note: weldoninhio, don't post in this thread again. Accusations like this aren't needed nor wanted here.


Buford T. Justice.

robarmstrong

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Numerous reasons for that have been expressed throughout the thread.

You replied to several of them You (presumeably) read several of them. You also appear to have chosen to ignore all of them, but you should at least, at this stage, KNOW what they were.

And I put it to you that, rather than deal with them, you chose to make a veiled threat of pedophilia. An accusation you have neither denied nor explained.

User was threadbanned so won't get an answer.

I do agree though, ridiculous to make a veiled accusation of someone having a "vested interest" in nonces not being caught.

Plenty of suggestions have been made in the thread, some good, some bad, it's clear that it is an issue that needs to be addressed and with the right representation & people behind it, changes will be made, whether we adapt the UK laws where it isn't a "victimless" crime or progressive steps are made to utilize the characters in these "hunter groups" that aren't gob****es. They're obviously good at drawing these creeps out, however they fail themselves by allowing trial by social media.

Strazdas

pah wrote: »

Haven't read the whole thread as 40 pgs long. It's probably been said already but I think govt should look at taking on these "hunters" provide then with specialist training and have them attached to a dedicated Garda unit providing an intelligence function.

If the law doesn't quite work in relation to this, entrapment fears etc - just change it.

No police force in the world would work alongside vigilantes. For all we know, 'Louise' and her buddies might have criminal convictions themselves.

I mentioned further up that there appears to be connections between the English version of these groups and the far right (giving you an indication of just what type of people are involved).

hatrickpatrick

robarmstrong wrote: »

however they fail themselves by allowing trial by social media.

When people lose faith in the justice system to punish criminals, is that not at least partly a signal that the justice system needs to be reformed? The trend of bypassing the courts has come about specifically and directly because of a general sentiment among both criminals and those who despise them, that once their case goes to court they'll get off with a slap on the wrist, nine times out of ten.

We're a democratic society. How many people can honestly say that they're happy with how the judiciary in this country operates? Suspended sentences for violent criminals on one hand, massive payouts for people who injure themselves through their own fault just because it happens to be on someone else's property, massive delays in hearing cases, etc.

Last week we had judges claiming that government intervention to deal with compensation payouts (which came after several newspaper reports outlining that spiralling insurance costs as a result of compensation culture are a key factor in why entertainment venues and nightlife have become so astronomically expensive for customers) was a threat to the independence of the judiciary. Surely adjustments to the legislative basis for court judgments are exactly what the other two branches of government exist to do?

Everyone criticises mandatory minimum sentences because of their historical use in victimless crimes, but would anyone genuinely oppose a mandatory sentence of double digits for convicted child rapists, organised gangsters, or serial violent thugs?

robarmstrong

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

When people lose faith in the justice system to punish criminals, is that not at least partly a signal that the justice system needs to be reformed? We're a democratic society. How many people can honestly say that they're happy with how the judiciary in this country operates? Suspended sentences for violent criminals on one hand, massive payouts for people who injure themselves through their own fault just because it happens to be on someone else's property, massive delays in hearing cases, etc.

Everyone criticises mandatory minimum sentences because of their historical use in victimless crimes, but would anyone genuinely oppose a mandatory sentence of double digits for convicted child rapists, organised gangsters, or serial violent thugs?

No I agree that things like this are in fact a sign to change the judiciary system, however I don't believe that a trial by social media is ever warranted, necessary or needed, in fact it can often be more damaging than good.

I do agree with your latter point also, I wouldn't have a problem whatsoever with a double digit sentence for someone who was caught engaging with one of those "decoys", after all - even though they are a decoy, the intent from the offender is clear as day and they're under the (false) impression that they are chatting to someone underage. They aren't doing this out of curiosity. They are doing this because they are pedophiles and our judicial system needs to change certain aspects/laws to accommodate that.

If a pedo said what they said to a decoy pretending to be a child they'd damn well say the same to a real child and it needs to be treated as such in the eyes of the law.

Lady Spangles

Someone I vaguely know (friend of a friend situation here) was targetted by so-called paedophile hunters. It was mistaken identity and the group responsible issued grovelling apologies, making it clear it was a mistake. But they had already published a video of the "sting" on their YouTube channel. Sure, it was taken down. But it had already been viewed however many times, leaving this poor guy suicidal. This happened in England (Leeds), but could all too easily happen anywhere.

I get why people laud such groups. But it's dangerous. Not just dangerous, it could screw up the legal proceedings that follow.

Outlaw Pete

Never hear of groups likes this running the likes of a Kinahan or a Gilligan out of an area.

cgcsb

Lady Spangles wrote: »

Someone I vaguely know (friend of a friend situation here) was targetted by so-called paedophile hunters. It was mistaken identity and the group responsible issued grovelling apologies, making it clear it was a mistake. But they had already published a video of the "sting" on their YouTube channel. Sure, it was taken down. But it had already been viewed however many times, leaving this poor guy suicidal. This happened in England (Leeds), but could all too easily happen anywhere.

I get why people laud such groups. But it's dangerous. Not just dangerous, it could screw up the legal proceedings that follow.

In England there was a spate of people claiming that some neighbor they didn't like was in fact either Jon Venables or Robert Thompson. Knowing full well they were not but sure accusations are enough these days and there's another person the government has to move for their own safety.

Marty Bird

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Never hear of groups likes this running the likes of a Kinahan or a Gilligan out of an area.

Totally different group of criminals to go up against. Everyone knows what the groups that you mention are up to and it’s very widely reported on. These other groups target the groomers/sickos who if you look at the profile might have never come to the attention of the police before.

Garibaldi?

Garibaldi? wrote: »

If I were approached on the street by an aggressive person like this I would not engage with that person. I would walk away. And woe betide anyone who would lay a hand on me!

It doesn't matter how big you are - or how big you think you are -if you're a single person facing four or five grown men, you'll have no chance.

robarmstrong wrote: »

they completely undo all that with the social media live streaming b*llocks.

I agree with you, although the woman who seems to head this operation has explained that they don't pre-record anything so that they can't be accused of editing data, if an Accused person gets assaulted.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Facebook page appears to be gone..?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Facebook page appears to be gone..?

Taken down on the advice of An Garda, hopefully.

Still won't put a stop to their vigilantism. They'll just migrate to Twitter, or YouTube.

freshpopcorn

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Facebook page appears to be gone..?

Is this the page or is it the UK one?

https://m.facebook.com/ChildProtectionIreland/

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Is this the page or is it the UK one?

https://m.facebook.com/ChildProtectionIreland/

Ah yes - it appears that it was only the video that was taken down.

Outlaw Pete

Marty Bird wrote: »

Totally different group of criminals to go up against. Everyone knows what the groups that you mention are up to and it’s very widely reported on. These other groups target the groomers/sickos who if you look at the profile might have never come to the attention of the police before.

Nonsense. There are plenty of scumbags dealing drugs, running areas with intimidation that aren't known to the larger public but these people don't see it as their duty to "target" them. Cause they're afraid of their shite too. Setting themselves up as judge, jury and executioner. Public shaming before due process is abhorrent. People have topped themselves over the actions of groups likes these.

All these groups are interested in is attention for themselves. Fcuk all else. If they just were after justice then they would do this stuff discreetly. Then just forward the information on to the authorities. If anything all this posting on social media does is increase the probability that the cases could be jeopardized and so why engage in activity that would do that if justice is the objective?

Marty Bird

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Nonsense. There are plenty of scumbags dealing drugs, running areas with intimidation that aren't known to the larger public but these people don't see it as their duty to "target" them. Cause they're afraid of their shite too. Setting themselves up as judge, jury and executioner. Public shaming before due process is abhorrent. People have topped themselves over the actions of groups likes these.

All these groups are interested in is attention for themselves. Fcuk all else. If they just were after justice then they would do this stuff discreetly. Then just forward the information on to the authorities. If anything all this posting on social media does is increase the probability that the cases could be jeopardized and so why engage in activity that would do that if justice is the objective?

It’s far from nonsense. The people who these types of groups are trying to identify are not on street corners in public. How do you know that they haven’t reported the type of crimes like open drug dealing.

BBFAN

Strazdas wrote: »

No police force in the world would work alongside vigilantes. For all we know, 'Louise' and her buddies might have criminal convictions themselves.

I mentioned further up that there appears to be connections between the English version of these groups and the far right (giving you an indication of just what type of people are involved).

As far as I know a lot of the English ones were found to have various convictions.

Marty Bird

Marty Bird wrote: »

How do you know that they haven’t reported the type of crimes like open drug dealing.

I don't; nor do you.

Bigmac1euro

So there was a video sent to me on WhatsApp, the video itself is quite disturbing but no gore content as it’s very quick. It’s a video of man being chased and he then jumps out in front of a transit van. The video made me think is it time for these groups to be stopped?
Or maybe they should just stop publishing this stuff on Facebook/live streaming.

victor8600

Why do you propagate a video like this?