@zrm's favorite website became faster, user-friendlier, and five times more popular under FBI control.
This is too terrible for words.
This is too terrible for words.
Operation Pacifier - FBI Distributes Child Porn to Tens of Thousands in Sting Operation
- Thread starter *Asterisk*
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2016
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
They could have done a better job by just looking at a few of the fucking open pedophiles we have threads and dox on and getting a warrant on their Internet connections, and they wouldn't even have to explain how the fuck they got their probable cause, since the perps publicly boast about it.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2014
James Terry Mitchell Jr. has never faced prosecution for raping a 9 year old or posting "tasteful nudes" of children, and the FBI is distributing child porn to catch pedos.
What a world.
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2015
Entrapment should not be allowed to be used by criminals to get free.
Fuck those cunts,i wish they could be thrown in a basement and be shot in the base of their inhuman skulls.
Fuck those cunts,i wish they could be thrown in a basement and be shot in the base of their inhuman skulls.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
The government should be stopping crime, not committing it themselves.
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2015
"Remember, it's acceptable when we are the powerful ones!"
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2015
They can convict people on this. Just like they convict people with planted police hitmen or drug dealers. Entrapment only applies when the defendant is coerced into committing the crime. It only applies in cases where the defendant can make the case that they were unlikely to commit the crime had the police/FBI/what have you not been there. Someone actively searching for child porn and finding that of the FBI would have a flimsy case.
Now if the FBI was sending people links via email without saying it was child porn and then arresting people who opened the link, it would be entrapment.
On top of that, the burden of proof is also on the defendant to prove entrapment. Even in cases of honest entrapment it's hard to prove. They have no case.
I'm not defending the FBI (this was a shitty move) but they can legally arrest and prosecute the people they've caught.
Genuine cases of entrapment involve an innocent party who would not be a criminal had they not been coerced into committing a crime. Even in those cases, it's hard to get off charges with an entrapment defense as it's hard to prove. No one is getting off from this.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
The cases aren't being dropped because of entrapment but because they refuse to give their "evidence" any evidentiary value by proving its provenance. You can't just introduce random shit as evidence. There are rules, and "lol I'm not gonna tell you where I got this" isn't one of the ways you introduce evidence.
Entrapment is something completely different and doesn't really apply to this. These are people who were already downloading this shit. They didn't need to be entrapped into it.
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2015
Oh. I didn't even read the article. Someone had just said they couldn't do anything because it would be a case of entrapment. I didn't know the FBI dropped the cases.
What exactly is the point of doing this if they knew the evidence wouldn't work? There are ways to use stuff like what they did to prosecute people. It's not really much different than having a fake drug dealer.
Maybe they just wanted to save face and not admit that they were distributing child porn to the public? Then again they should know they can't prosecute on the basis of "trust us, he's bad. Can't tell you how we know, but he's bad.".
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2015
That was just my estimation of what could happen, but I'm just a wise-ass, not a lawyer.
- Joined
- May 19, 2016
Not really, I mean there are heaps of Pedophiles out there. But the ones the FBI are mainly interested in catching are the bottom feeders, the ones who don't have any political or financial power. So they have to keep throwing the net further and further. I mean if you've read the news you'd find, the Westminster Pedophile Dossier, Rotherham, the private jet known as the "Lolita Express", Jimmy Saville, these are just the recent scandals to come to light and yet it seems when things get to close to the famous and powerful, evidence starts to go missing, witnesses are silenced one way or the other.
And when you go to Hollywood, there are rumors swirling around people all the time. Sometimes they come out, sometimes they are buried.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/bryan-singer-sex-abuse-case-699828
http://defamer.gawker.com/remember-when-38-year-old-jerry-seinfeld-dated-a-17-yea-1714153938
http://www.pajiba.com/think_pieces/...es-his-teen-stars-grew-into-internet-fact.php
These are some of the scandals that have made news.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Child_sexual_abuse_in_the_United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Child_sexual_abuse_in_the_United_Kingdom
Now this isn't even an exhaustive list, since most child abuse scandals aren't properly categorised in wikipedia.
I mean just recently:
http://www.ibtimes.com/usa-womens-g...es-failure-alert-law-enforcement-puts-2398332
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
The FBI didn't drop them. The judge did because the FBI is refusing to provide any basis for the "evidence" they gathered. The FBI also doesn't prosecute, it's a law enforcement agency. One hopes most of these cases do go forward because the defendants are probably guilty as shit, but if they don't, it will be the FBI's fault for this fucking stupidity.
- Joined
- May 25, 2015
Alphabet Soup is a fucking disgrace. Between the CIA and the NSA spying on us, the ATF burning our houses down/raping our women/killing our doges/handing guns out to criminals to justify it's existence, and this shit, it's a fucking travesty.
Amazing. You distributed something that inherently requires the harm of a child to the perverted filth of the world. Bravo.
Amazing. You distributed something that inherently requires the harm of a child to the perverted filth of the world. Bravo.
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2015
The government can't even be sleazy and dishonest without utter incompetency.
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2016
Sleazy and dishonest is one thing. Conspiracy to distribute child pornography takes it to a whole other level.
Thanks for ruining Seinfeld for me. I could overlook the whole racism thing. What's next, Jason Alexander is a diaperfur?
- Joined
- May 19, 2016
Maybe, this is some of the ones people know of.
http://www.therichest.com/rich-list/most-shocking/10-celebrities-who-have-dated-underage-girls/
When R. Kelly was exploring his love for teenage girls, we didn’t have access to the plethora of information that can now be found on the internet. Luckily for the R&B singer, his romance and marriage to 16-year-old singer Aaliyah was kept under wraps for many years, but his sex romps with other teens would land him in a heap of trouble.
In 2002, a sex tape was leaked showing Kelly engaging in sex with a girl who was just 14 years old. Although the victim claimed the sex was consensual, charges were brought forth, and the singer was eventually acquitted of all counts. In 2003, another video of Kelly having sex with a minor was discovered, but those charges were thrown out.
Kelly was married throughout all of the underage sex and child pornography court trials. Thankfully, his wife (now ex-wife) was of the legal age of 22 at the time of their wedding day.
As long as you are famous and rich enough, you can literally appear in Child Porn and be fine.
Last edited:
A
AA 102
Guest
kiwifarms.net
I don't see how this will accomplish anything except to compound the problem. Now the people who weren't caught have their hands on and will distribute whatever the FBI gave them, or they'll wise up to FBI tactics and will be harder to catch.
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2016
It depends. They didn't reveal their tactics because of this, most likely. Although now it's a paradox where they don't reveal their hacks so their exploits aren't patched and people don't catch on to their tricks, but also that the courts won't accept the evidence you gathered because they want the methods to be revealed for the sake of transparency unless you comply. The only way I imagine this would even make sense is if they're trying to save it for a real big case. Same with the stingrays. Or to use it without explaining as often as they can and throw the prosecution under the bus on the ones where the judges become too nosy.
- Joined
- May 24, 2014
i cant get over the fact they decided "operation pacifier" was a good name for distributing pictures of baby rape
someone at the FBI is a sick fuck
someone at the FBI is a sick fuck