Children blackmailed by paedophile via Facebook.

political analyst

At Ipswich Crown Court, prolific paedophile David Wilson has been sentenced to 25 years in prison.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-norfolk-55979555

Once he had a compromising image of a child, Wilson would then use it to blackmail the victim into sending increasingly extreme imagery of themselves or, in some cases, to commit sexual abuse - or "contact offending by proxy" - on their siblings.

One of his victims was just four years old.

One of his victims is now 16 years old. He was 11 when he was first contacted by Wilson.

"I was completely unaware of dangerous people online and in the world," the boy said.

When he set up his social media account he had a number of friends on there - and a girl purporting to be about 12 years old.

"She contacted me and I had a look at her account to see what she looked like. She looked like a normal girl, about my age, and it didn't concern me, and she also talked and approached me in a way that was very normal," he said.

"It didn't alarm me so I decided to carry on talking to her thinking it was just a girl my age. Over time, I was attracted to this person who I thought was a pretty young girl, but as it progressed I began to feel very alarmed by the way they started to talk to me.

"I was concerned that this wasn't a girl and I was very scared. I kept on asking him to leave me alone and the only way he would leave me alone was if I sent him indecent images."

In a desperate bid to free himself from Wilson, the boy agreed to send some sexual images of himself.

What I don't understand is why even a child as young as 11 years would think that supplying an indecent image of oneself is a way to deal with online harassment.

Did it not occur to the boy that, by supplying such an image of himself, he was giving the person on the other end of the line ammunition to use against him?

Donald Trump

political analyst wrote: »

At Ipswich Crown Court, prolific paedophile David Wilson has been sentenced to 25 years in prison.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-norfolk-55979555


What I don't understand is why even a child as young as 11 years would think that supplying an indecent image of oneself is a way to deal with online harassment.

Did it not occur to the boy that, by supplying such an image of himself, he was giving the person on the other end of the line ammunition to use against him?

I'm confused. Are you saying you don't understand how an 11 year old child might not be as streetwise or logical as some adults?

lucalux

political analyst wrote: »

At Ipswich Crown Court, prolific paedophile David Wilson has been sentenced to 25 years in prison.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-norfolk-55979555





What I don't understand is why even a child as young as 11 years would think that supplying an indecent image of oneself is a way to deal with online harassment.

Did it not occur to the boy that, by supplying such an image of himself, he was giving the person on the other end of the line ammunition to use against him?

Maybe you don't understand how 11 year olds see the world?

If you don't understand how they can be very trusting, and become very afraid, and believe exactly what they are told, that is.

political analyst

Donald Trump wrote: »

I'm confused. Are you saying you don't understand how an 11 year old child might not be as streetwise or logical as some adults?

Wouldn't a child that young still know what the phrase 'digging a hole for yourself' means?

kippy

Donald Trump wrote: »

I'm confused. Are you saying you don't understand how an 11 year old child might not be as streetwise or logical as some adults?

lucalux wrote: »

Maybe you don't understand how 11 year olds see the world?

If you don't understand how they can be very trusting, and become very afraid, and believe exactly what they are told, that is.

I don't think the OP realises there are adults who can and have ended up in similiar positions, usually adults with some difficulties but adults nonethe less.

kippy

Donald Trump wrote: »

I'm confused. Are you saying you don't understand how an 11 year old child might not be as streetwise or logical as some adults?

lucalux wrote: »

Maybe you don't understand how 11 year olds see the world?

If you don't understand how they can be very trusting, and become very afraid, and believe exactly what they are told, that is.

I don't think the OP realises there are adults who can and have ended up in similiar positions, usually adults with some difficulties but adults nonethe less.

And also - in before the "victim blaming" alegations start getting thrown around.

mfceiling

political analyst wrote: »

Wouldn't a child that young still know what the phrase 'digging a hole for yourself' means?

You obviously don't have kids or have ever met an 11 year old child.

Who lets children have a Facebook, or any social media page anyway?

kippy

bubblypop wrote: »

Who lets children have a Facebook, or any social media page anyway?

There are a few core questions here.
This is one of them.

lucalux

political analyst wrote: »

Wouldn't a child that young still know what the phrase 'digging a hole for yourself' means?

No.

Will you catch yerself on? please and thanks.

biko

Children that young cannot be expected to have any cop on. That's why it's imperative we protect them until they are old enough to be wary of strangers themselves. Even if it means withholding or closely monitoring their internet.

People that prey on the very young, or the very old, should just be thrown in a dungeon and forgotten about.

DeanAustin

Holy ****, we've just taken victim blaming to a whole new level.

Me_Grapes

What I don't understand is why even a child as young as 11 years would think that supplying an indecent image of oneself is a way to deal with online harassment.

Did it not occur to the boy that, by supplying such an image of himself, he was giving the person on the other end of the line ammunition to use against him?

That's your take from this story?

Wow.

Nabber

political analyst wrote: »

What I don't understand is why even a child as young as 11 years would think that supplying an indecent image of oneself is a way to deal with online harassment.

Did it not occur to the boy that, by supplying such an image of himself, he was giving the person on the other end of the line ammunition to use against him?

Manipulation, bullying, gaslighting. Everyone reacts differently.
In this case it's an 11year old. There is a reason we don't allow 11 year olds the same freedoms or responsibilities of an an adult.

OP I'm not sure what you don't understand about it, most people have very few memories of being 11. To say that you'd know better at that age I'd be sceptical of.
Being put in such a situation maybe just never happened to you, how you deal with that at 11 only your former 11 year old self would know.

Donald Trump

kippy wrote: »

I don't think the OP realises there are adults who can and have ended up in similiar positions, usually adults with some difficulties but adults nonethe less.

And also - in before the "victim blaming" alegations start getting thrown around.

That's actually why I specifically used the phrase "some adults"!

political analyst wrote: »

Wouldn't a child that young still know what the phrase 'digging a hole for yourself' means?

I wouldn't assume that an 11 year old will foresee all possible consequences. Especially if they have an adult pressuring them to do things.

pah

OP do you think this offender only targeted the kids mentioned here. If he cast his net wide enough eventually he is going to get responses and some of those will be from kids who are vulnerable enough to be tricked into doing these things which then escalate out of control.

Can we mention what a vile POS this guy was?

I would suggest a little research on your part to try and understand a little better.


Here’s a show for you… Age, Sex, Location Documentary on One Podcast

https://open.spotify.com/episode/0FfSXqa03Hb0nd1yttmLWv?si=qxYUrwXgSzaWvTIVZ5g5mA

political analyst

pah wrote: »

OP do you think this offender only targeted the kids mentioned here. If he cast his net wide enough eventually he is going to get responses and some of those will be from kids who are vulnerable enough to be tricked into doing these things which then escalate out of control.

Can we mention what a vile POS this guy was?

I would suggest a little research on your part to try and understand a little better.


Here’s a show for you… Age, Sex, Location Documentary on One Podcast

https://open.spotify.com/episode/0FfSXqa03Hb0nd1yttmLWv?si=qxYUrwXgSzaWvTIVZ5g5mA

According to the following article, he is thought to have targeted around 500 boys.

https://news.sky.com/story/david-wilson-victims-of-prolific-paedophile-detail-impact-of-abuse-ahead-of-sentencing-12214322

The mother of another young victim broke down in tears several times as she recounted the effect of Wilson's abuse of her son.

Dabbing at her eyes, she told the judge: "I failed to protect my child from the monster who preyed on him. I was unable to keep him safe."

Another mother described watching her 15-year-old son being arrested and taken from their home because of indecent images he had exchanged with Wilson.

We may never be aware of exactly what the fate of those boys who were arrested after they did what POS blackmailed them into doing. One of them is in a children's home.

I know that 10 is the age of criminal responsibility in England (and here in Ireland for murder and rape but it's 12 for other crimes). Would those boys who were arrested be able to use insanity as a defence if they were charged with sexual abuse of children?

An eleven year old is not even half way to a fully developed brain.


And that's before we even get into the whole grooming aspect.

biko

Count Basie wrote: »

Can we just start killing paedophiles already?

Are you in a country with the death penalty? I'm not.

simongurnick

bubblypop wrote: »

Who lets children have a Facebook, or any social media page anyway?

I don't think its about allowing the account. All of these games nowadays life Fortnite, Roblox and Minecraft involve a social element, such as live group gaming and chat rooms etc.
I think the important part is having oversight into what your kids are doing online and teaching them off the risks and dangers in an open and frank manner.

political analyst

simongurnick wrote: »

I don't think its about allowing the account. All of these games nowadays life Fortnite, Roblox and Minecraft involve a social element, such as live group gaming and chat rooms etc.
I think the important part is having oversight into what your kids are doing online and teaching them off the risks and dangers in an open and frank manner.

But the most sensible thing for parents to do would be to prohibit their children from using social media until they're 14 at the very least - 16 would be even better!

simongurnick

political analyst wrote: »

But the most sensible thing for parents to do would be to prohibit their children from using social media until they're 14 at the very least - 16 would be even better!

Yeah, that's fair. I have kids in this age range. My eldest Lad is turning 14 and uses discord. My other boys are 10 and 11 and I wont let them on it, but they do have interactions through their games, which I mentioned. So, the point is its hard to keep them off every platform nowadays and ultimately they all pose a threat.

wes

Count Basie wrote: »

Can we just start killing paedophiles already?

Why? From a punishment POV, death is a quick mercy in some ways.

Life in prison without a chance of getting out, would be a far worse punishment, than a quick death.

smellyoldboot

wes wrote: »

Why? From a punishment POV, death is a quick mercy in some ways.

Life in prison without a chance of getting out, would be a far worse punishment, than a quick death.

Fcuk punishment, it's a useless pointless concept. It's about removing from society, things that will never be any use to it and will always pose a significant danger to others. To which end killing the bastards would work perfectly.

wally1990

wes wrote: »

Why? From a punishment POV, death is a quick mercy in some ways.

Life in prison without a chance of getting out, would be a far worse punishment, than a quick death.

Because I don't want to pay for them to be kept alive in prison after their crimes
It's tax payers money that will fund it

Anyway, we are off the point

OP , no the Child is 11.
He is a child
Cannot be blamed here

Questions around social media etc are his parents fault for not monitoring and even allowing him have it in the first place and it breaks FB terms of service at his age too.

But the Child is not "wrong" here in this
Christ, he was only an 11 year old boy then

Vic_08

political analyst wrote: »

At Ipswich Crown Court, prolific paedophile David Wilson has been sentenced to 25 years in prison.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-norfolk-55979555





What I don't understand is why even a child as young as 11 years would think that supplying an indecent image of oneself is a way to deal with online harassment.

Did it not occur to the boy that, by supplying such an image of himself, he was giving the person on the other end of the line ammunition to use against him?

Considering some of the utterly batsh!t illogical internet derived drivel your account has espoused on these forums I find it more than a little ironic you cannot understand a child being taken in by an online predator.

An Ri rua

Op, your username is ironic. Given the 1st post and replies by you thereafter, I can only assume that your expertise is derived from political analysis of naive minds such as the Green Party or the new SF babies.

I've been online in the library since I was 10, making little anime websites and some such nonsense. Got 512kb broadband when Eircom cut the price in half (to €54.45, still remember the price from it taking 6 months to convince my mother :P ) as soon as it was available to my house.
I had more sense than most kids. I managed to not get caught up in any ****. I saw stuff before I was ready to as well but at that stage it wasn't "normal". I wouldn't go up to someone and tell them I'd seen porn. Over the last 2 decades it's gotten way more extreme, way more accessible and way more "acceptable". I'm glad that I just missed out on that era.
I'm now 32, I'm a "techie", I work in IT. If I have kids they won't be getting on the internet before puberty. And even then it'll be limited.

simongurnick

simongurnick wrote: »

I think the important part is having oversight into what your kids are doing online and teaching them off the risks and dangers in an open and frank manner.

This.

dirk_dangler

The parents should be given some type of punishment for letting their children online unsupervised.
The amount of pure filth online is unreal, then we have brutal beheading videos and mexican cartel executions, dont fool yourself in thinking these are hidden away in the dark corners of the web, easy to stumble into these types of things online, dont believe me? Search for Grand canyon and you will find some tramp flashing her Grand canyon, you know what i mean!

donaghs

bubblypop wrote: »

Who lets children have a Facebook, or any social media page anyway?

Lots of primary kids have smartphones, so potentially, then can have access to almost everything. I don't agree with this, and is makes kids without smartphones feel left out and uncool.

The parents fault. Can hardly claim ignorance anymore - either dont care or gave into nagging.