Knitting. Yarn. Fiber artistry. More knitting. Nursing school. Hospice work. Death and the dying process. Phoenix Raven's. Knitting. Yarn. Oh, and Life As An Air Force Wife.
Good cause, bad practice.
Published on June 5, 2004 By dharmagrl In Current Events

I've been a frequent visitor to www.pervertedjustice.com in the past few days. 

This is site that has volunteers go into chat rooms posing as teenage girls and waits for some older man to take the bait and engage them in conversations of a sexual nature.  They then tell him he's been 'busted' and post his personal info (name, age, picture, phone number and even address on some cases) on the front page of the site.  They call it 'taking down wanna be pedophiles'. 

Something about this site made me uneasy.  Really uneasy.  So I went and did a little searching. 

Contrary to what the sites owners would have you believe, they're not endorsed by Law Enforcement Authorities.  The link that they have on the site to their 'police friends' is actually to 'Police World', a message board that is supposed to be for law enforcement officers but that anyone can join.  In fact, I've found more evidence and statements from LE officers and officials saying that they think it's a bad idea than I have in support of the site.

The main concern seems to be that the volunteers aren't trained.

"The Perverted Justice investigator wanna be's think it's so easy to go into a chat room and just start talking, and for them it is, because they have no goals in mind other than humiliating someone and getting media attention" said Julie Posey, a Colorado activist who has worked with police in chat-room stings for 8 years and helped convict more than 70 men.

Ray Johnson, a deputy investigator with the Internet crime unit for the Wayne County MI sheriff's department said that vigilante stings also make prosecution more difficult, because they put people on notice that police might investigate them, and they don't folow the rules the police use to avoid issues on entrapment. Deputy Johnson said that if he tried to use transcripts of chat room come-ons in a criminal proceeding "they'd throw it right out in a heartbeat"

My own personal investigative sources (Not my husband) state that whilst they too agree that PJ's volunteers "hearts are in the right place" but that "they're playing a dangerous game and leaving them selves wide-open for prosecution.  Police departments are doing things to try and catch these perverts, and these folks make our job that much harder"

So, it would seem that my feeling of uneasiness is somewhat justified.  Don't misunderstand me, I want to see these losers exposed as much as the next person.  But, I want to see them prosecuted, to see them jailed, to see their names of the Sex Offender's registry. I want to see the job done properly, with the backing of law enforcement and the US criminal justice system. Pervertedjustice.com , while it's intentions are good, in my opinion just isn't the appropriate means to get that job done.

 


Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Sep 25, 2004
Though I agree that catching criminals is best left to the police, why not try to prevent the crimes from happening at all by putting a scare into the perverts who would commit them? Justice always comes too late...after the crime is committed and the harm is done. Stop them beforehand.
on Sep 25, 2004
The only way to cure pedophilia is with an injection of lead.
I have seen the site and it seems that they really get their jollies messing with these losers. There is no way to use this crap to put the pervs in jail; so why bother?
Marvin, wasn't charlotte church your thing?
on Sep 25, 2004

have seen the site and it seems that they really get their jollies messing with these losers. There is no way to use this crap to put the pervs in jail; so why bother?


Exactly.  If this was leading to ciminal investigations and subsequent prosecutions then I'd be all for it.  98% of the time it's not.  It's all done for publicity and show.


Rightwinger: I'm all for deterrents, and this might be a wonderful deterrent...but it leaves a lot to be desired.

on Sep 25, 2004
.
Rightwinger: I'm all for deterrents, and this might be a wonderful deterrent...but it leaves a lot to be desired.


Not if it works. Embarassment and humiliation are powerful weapons, especially to those men (and women...let's not forget that pedophilia is not restricted to men) who have something to lose, like families or jobs, for example.
on Sep 26, 2004

I checked out the site because of this article...I wasn't impressed.

My first concern was that the nature in which they post the IM's on the site was almost voyeuristic...do we really need to know the sordid details?

The second concern I have is, anyone who knows anything about pedophiles knows that they don't disappear because they've been flamed on a website; they're still pedophiles and still likely to act unless apprehended. The difference is, since they've been "outed" on a website that CAN'T be used as evidence in court, they've learned a little more what to look out for.

Personally, I think the perverted justice folks are a little perverted themselves.

on Sep 26, 2004

Not if it works.


But how do we know it works?  Until there are stats to say that pedophiles are not re-offending because of being exposed on sites like this, I'm not going to believe that it works. The likelihood of prosecution from exposure on this site is low, despite what the owners would lead you to believe....the link to their "police friends" is to a message board, not to a certified police organization.  For me, prosecution is the best deterrent, and it's simply not happening here.  There's a reason for that.


The methods that they use are too open to manipulation.  Some of the scenarios smack of entrapment....most of them wouldn't stand a chance in court with a half-way decent defender.   It's just too...lackadasical.  There are some things that are best left to law enforcement to deal with, and this is one of them.  Just because you don't see or hear about the cops doing anything, it doesn't mean that they're not.

on Mar 01, 2005

.

2 Pages1 2