Friday, 16 December 2016

Paedophile Hunters [Sic] And Their Friends - Why They Are Pointless, Time-Wasting, Resource-Wasting, Ignorant, Hater, Fools

"Social media are like a box of chocolates ..."


(1) Prologue

Dispelling the myths and correcting the terminology of 'The Hunters'.

An Excellent Overview ...



"Stinson Hunter was the man who discovered that if you dangle a carrot in front of a donkey on an adult dating site, soon or later, you will get a nibble. He was entirely motivated by ‘’fame and fortune’’ (as evidenced as many times over by so many people), and in my book, was just downright lazy. His method of catching ‘so-called paedophiles’ was entirely lethargic (he realised it was an easy score indeed – rather than seeking real offenders which takes more time and effort), and his evidence gathering was also half-hearted (he often claimed the police and CPS had failed him – but this was proven many times to be downright lies).

Many other similar hunters, have followed suit, even down to the lazy methods of catching ‘offenders’. Instead of dealing with high-risk individuals (like real detectives do), they too, catfish (what mainly appears to be mixture of idiots and simpletons, people with low morals, or even people with low comprehension in some cases) men on adult dating sites. You only have to look at some of the latest stings to know this is still true today. Men stating they didn’t believe it was a child on an adult site. In some cases they seem genuinely confused, in others, there is evidence they genuinely did believe it.

These vigilantes keep claiming there are scores of real children on the very adult sites and apps they decoy on. Not a single one has ever evidenced this whatsoever – which speaks volumes. No substance to their argument.

Now for the analogy:

If I was to deliberately place valuables in my car and leave the window open, I would undoubtedly be ‘inviting crime.’ This is EXACTLY what vigilantes are doing.

A skilled car thief would not require an ‘open window,’ as they would have the tools for the job. However, an opportunist WOULD be tempted by my open window. I have baited that person, and lured them in.

The real paedophile that is a high risk to children, like the skilled car thief, knows how to commit his crime very well. He seeks children where they actually exist and certainly would NOT go looking for the subject of his criminality, where they do (or are not proven to) not exist.

The ‘invented paedophile’ is the one that became the opportunist by my ‘open window invite.’ He joined an ‘adult dating site’ (most probably seeking the company of adults – for whatever purpose ranging from romance to sexual encounters), and there is no/little proof he was seeking anything other than an adult encounter. He simply became that ‘offender’ BECAUSE they gave him an easy ‘open window’.

What blurs the line of course is the age range. This started out as ‘14 or 15’ year old decoys, and has now progressed to much younger. Does this suggest they are truly showing sexual inclination toward children, and therefor a ‘paedophile’ in the true definition of what the word actually means? Well, yes, probably or most likely – but we still have some area of doubt over whether that was ever their original intention when joining adult dating sites (which are the majority of cases caught be vigilantes over the last ten years).

Now imagine I have a team of hoodie wearing security men with me. I have a camera, a facebook page, and I live stream confrontations of my captures each time a thief, whether a true thief or an opportunistic person, enters my vehicle. Would that make me a vigilante? Damn right it would.
For me, it seems a huge missed opportunity that people like Stinson Hunter did not seize upon the fact that there are real offenders out there targetting REAL CHILDREN that exist on sites/apps designed for children.

There has been the odd rare exception such as Shane Brannigan, who I am led to believe only decoyed on the liked of Facebook (where real kids exist = Shane is clued up), and there once was an effort to protect kids on something called ‘BIGO’ (which I applaud and support 100%), but the majority of stings have been performed on ‘Mr Opportunist’ on adult only sites – I GUARANTEE THIS IS A FACT.

In some respects, it seems a rather bizarre situation that a man talks to another adult on an adult dating site – and then goes to prison for it on the strength of a fabrication. Also pretty ironic that all these ‘children’ on adult dating sites will undoubtedly just be decoys – and that by employing this particular hunting method, no real children will ever be protected or ‘saved’ (sad but true – although there have been rare occasion where real children have some to light – but this is usually either pure luck, or because a parent has approached hunters directly – instead of going to the police like they should).

Most hunters/decoys/followers of vigilante pages reading this will be saying ‘he’s an apologist.’ What they don’t understand (because they never do), is that I understand that ‘technically speaking’ they are breaking laws, and I understand that from a moral point of view ‘they are/were wrong to get involved’ – even if it’s a twisted fantasy in their mind, and they never intended it to go further than just chat online. So do I feel sorry for them? No, not at all, they made their beds and have to lie in it. BUT – you are still assisting to incite a crime with people that may have never even thought of committing a crime, let alone, one of the most abhorrent nature. If the decoy was not there, the crime would never have existed. This is one case where you can definitely say ‘victimless crime’ in the majority of cases.

My issue with vigilante hunters is thus:

Presenting a false reality

This idea that the police are letting the public down is an outrageous fabrication of the truth. The police do not waste their time dealing with ‘opportunists’ on adult only sites as they will NEVER be considered a genuine high risk to real children (unless there are special circumstances – such as repeat offender etc...). The hunting community just don’t seem to understand that a good proportion of ‘offenders’ getting remanded, are in fact done so simply because they are deemed to be in danger (from the public), or a possible threat to themselves. This is further confirmation they are not considered a high risk to real children. 

The police will always respond to cases involving real children straight away – hence why there is a department often called ‘Central Referrals.’ When they receive a ‘first referral,’ even in the middle of the night, they respond (hence why detectives specialising in child protection will be on call out of office hours – if department not 24/7). Unlike vigilantes, the police do a very good job of dealing with real offenders that go after real children. This is a FACT which most vigilantes deny due to the need to justify their own existence.

Hunting groups have also created the false impression (due to what I’ve already explained) that there is a ‘pandemic of paedophiles.’ Frightened parents now think their child could be groomed, based on this false reality being presented. It’s pretty simple to understand – if you don’t allow your kids to roam onto sites they should not visit – they will not encounter these ‘so -called monsters,’ who are ‘becoming monsters’ after joining an adult dating site – and not, seeking real children where they actually exist in the first place. Besides, legislation to force all adult related sites to operate a string verification sign up policy would completely make these hunters redundant instantly (unless they wanted to pursue real offenders instead).

Questionable motives.

There are people that seem to be out to avenge their own experience at the hands of a real paedophile – and while I have the greatest sympathy for real victims – I do not believe ‘inciting a crime’ and presenting a ‘false reality’ is the answer. People wanting to contribute due to their own experience would do far better either getting on the campaign trail for changes in the law, or doing whatever they can to get the authorities to agree to ‘regulated police volunteers,’ that could actually sign up to assist detectives in capturing the real bad guys (and girls).

Then there are those that clearly enjoy the attention and adulation, clearly seek sexual encounter opportunities with besotted colleagues/fans (so many hunter penis pics going about – sheesh), and those that are clearly motivated by money, and can see that there is money to be made from gullible people who believe their ‘hysterical hype.’

I have been in favour of regulation from the start (this would have prevented all the unsavoury aspects we have witnessed over the years), and I am in favour of pro-active ideas that would help protect children in an online context (I have quite a few good ones, do you?).

To those who find my posts ‘disturbing,’ get over yourselves. I will never apologise for having the ability to see these vigilante scammers for what they truly are. Feral, fraudulent, and mainly, knuckle-dragging f**kwits." 

'Formal' Version

(2) Child / Victim / Risk / Danger

There is no child or victim, these are inchoate offences. No minor is at risk of harm.

In almost every one of these entrapments, the primary reason why the target is not remanded in custody, is that, they present no significant risk of harm to the public. When they are remanded, it is usually a matter of being for their own health/safety and/or accommodation difficulties.

Ultimately, this is why sentences are, quite-rightly, relatively short/trivial, in the eyes of some.

The later consequences are not, in many cases.


(3) Paedo

Due to the faux ages, adopted by the decoys, no paedophiles are involved in the process ...



The Puzzle of Male Chronophilias; Dr M.C. Seto

As we have shown ...

... the very popular, if not the peak, age of attraction for males to females, is in the Hebephilic and Ephebophilic ranges, i.e. 11-18, hence the success of these entrapments.

A biological and evolutionary imperative, all things being equal; arbitrary, socially-constructed, laws cannot change those.

 (4) Sick (Bastard / Cunt etc)

An attraction to minors, of whatever age, has never been deemed a sickness (i.e. a disease, a physical or mental dysfunction/disability).

Prior to DSM V and in ICD 10 (soon to be ICD 11), the attraction was one criterion, within the 'diagnosis' of Paedophilia (now, Paedophilic Disorder).

Alone, such an attraction (which is, fundamentally, a thought), whether preferential or not, is not rare, nor a sickness; nor is it an act; nor is it illegal; nor is it immoral (as it is not chosen).

The legal legitimacy, of the birth of these men, is, also, never established.

This is a deemed useful, derogatory, dehumanising, but false, stereotype, so as to create, maintain, shame and bait 'The Other', and for those in sexual denial, amongst the 'Hunter' groups.

(5) Dirty / Filthy (Bastard / Cunt etc)

We have yet to see any correlation, between those men who have been stung, and level of cleanliness.

They have ranged, from the untidy and/or scruffy (mainly, at home), to the scrupulously-clean and well-dressed.

Once again, the legal legitimacy, of the birth of these men, is, also, never established.

This is a deemed useful, derogatory, and dehumanising, but false, stereotype, so as to create, maintain, shame and bait 'The Other'.


(6) Nonce / Bacon Bonce / Beast / Animal

Contrary to popular belief, a crime is not established, until guilt has been decided in a court of law, or the equivalent. What may be 'obvious', from the initial evidence, may be a completely different reality, once the facts have been scrutinised.

All defendants are innocent people, until guilt has been accepted or established. This is why NFA occurs, people are acquitted and, unfortunately, miscarriages of justice do occur, with the subsequent quashing of verdicts etc.

When in prison, then a 'Nonce'; before and after, not.

These names, are deemed useful, derogatory, dehumanising labels, so as to create, maintain, shame and bait 'The Other', and for those in sexual denial, amongst the 'Hunter' groups.

These are the same processes, which occur, in prisons, amongst the 'Main Population'.

More to follow.


(7) Not Vigilantes

No, no, no, no ... that is just one aspect,
of what some of them do, implicitly or explicitly, read on ...

6/7/17; Silent Justice; the horse's mouth

They are vigilantes, because they do not have Legal Authority (following the law, alone, is not Legal Authority) ...

The effectiveness of Legal Authority builds on the acceptance of the validity of the following mutually inter-dependent ideas ...
  1. That any given legal norm may be established by agreement or by imposition, on the bases of expediency or rational values or both, with a claim to obedience at least on the part of the members of the corporate group.
  2. That every body of law consists essentially in a consistent system of abstract rules which have (normally) been intentionally established.
  3. That thus the typical person in authority occupies an ‘office’.
  4. That the person who obeys authority does so, as it is usually stated, only in his capacity as a ‘member’ of the corporate group and what he obeys is only ‘the law’.
  5. In conformity with point 3, it is held that the members of the corporate group, in so far as they obey a person in authority, do not owe this obedience to him as an individual, but to the impersonal order.

Or ...

For additional consideration ...


(8) The Predator Myth

(Embedded Tweets - click dates)



(9) Not Entrapment

(Embedded Tweets - click date).

That is entrapment.

26th July 2017 

Teacher accused of child sex plot will not stand trial after judges rule he was victim of entrapment by undercover officers

Monday, 28 February, 2000, 17:59 GMT

Sheriff rules entrapment illegal

Thank You For The Confirmation


(10) Raising Awareness 

Name three people, stung, from one year ago, even if, they still have the same name.

Can you, if you are not an obsessed, 'hunter/decoy'?

Of course not, memories are very short, on such things; same for faces.

Naming and Shaming is never good.


 (11) Protecting Kids / Prosecutions

(a) Meeting of minors and the target group, which is entrapped, is negligible, in terms of risk ...

Posted: April 19, 2017

Kent Police issue a stern statement after a paedophile hunter sting went wrong in Bluewater

""I would therefore urge anyone who believes they have information or evidence of online grooming, or knows that a suspect is planning to meet a potential victim, to contact Kent Police at the earliest opportunity so that police officers can deal with these meetings and capture the best possible evidence.

"We do have significant concerns about people taking the law into their own hands and the methods they use, and in some cases acting outside of the law, and would strongly advise against getting involved in, or setting up activities to entrap those suspected of intending to commit offences.

"Although seemingly well-meaning, this can significantly hinder our work, compromise on-going investigations and negate months of investigative work.

"There is also the risk that it can potentially identify people who are completely innocent and mistakenly associate them with grooming offences.

"I would add that whilst police have resources and expertise to protect the vulnerable and people with mental health issues, members of the public generally do not, and can cause such individuals to be placed at serious risk of harm.

"The positive news is that awareness among children and young people about the dangers of meeting strangers has grown considerably and incidents where children meet adults in these circumstances are extremely rare.""

(b) It is pointless ...


Sill Waiting

(c) Social media sexual (and not) participation of minors, is self-policing and self-regulating, particularly in terms of larger age differences ...

May 09, 2017 

You’re a dirty paedo, go away: How teenage girl saw off Cheltenham sex offender on Facebook

"When she refused to co-operate and you threatened to make her famous by posting about her on Facebook that must have been very distressing for her.

 "Luckily she fought back and brought matters to an end by reporting matters to her family. She has coped admirably with her predicament ..." 

June 13, 2017 

Schoolgirl warns of grooming dangers after being targeted by sexual predator

"A schoolgirl targeted by a drug dealing sexual predator has warned others of the dangers of grooming.

The young victim boldly spurned RB's (43) offers of cash, alcohol, drugs and free taxi rides to visit his home.

She told him: "I'm underage, I'm 15.

"You're too old.""


Dad shares predatory messages sent to seven–year-old daughter on popular music app

Hunters do not target minors, in their stings (for obvious, legal, reasons), but they are the markedly-largest group of those, who online (or offline) groom, meet and carry out sexual activities.

(d) Increasing risk to minors.

(Embedded Tweets - click date)


(12) Using Their 'Own' Time And Money / For The Social Good

The Supposed Pay-Off, along with Non-Judicial Naming and Shaming

More to follow.


(13) Safety and Survival

Risk of serious harm, or worse, for all, for nothing (see 10(b) and 14).

(14) Haters, Weak-Minded, Bullies and Empire Builders





We could spend all day, posting these infighting debacles

(15) Response, Revenge and Payback / Unintended Consequences

Published on May 7, 2017 

We've had a call to control, we are concerned for your safety. Jason Ford LOL

May 8, 2017 

Wanted Southampton Man Jason Ford calls 999 to say he’s off to stab someone

(a) If one 'destroys' another's life, particularly for no good, real, reason, at least one of them is going to be looking for payback (ironically, Shane's MO, in fact).

Some are clever enough, to take it out on those who are very vulnerable, leaving the less vulnerable to weep and regret it all began. Some, have enough suitable and loyal contacts, to take it out on anyone. 

An eye for an eye.

To laugh about the possibility, shows a terrible lack of judgement, in those who laugh and for the safety of others.

(b) The second issue, is, the 'Nothing Left To Lose', consequence.

Consider the choice one has to make, if one has abducted a minor, or offended on one, when one has nothing left to lose. Compare with the USA, extreme sentencing and murdered minors, and the cases of Mr Ian Huntley, Mr Roy Whiting, Mr Mark Bridger and other UK offenders, may have relevance.

(c) The third issue, is, further, ongoing, inevitable, costs (let alone the legal/judicial/penal bill).

8/6/17; Silent Justice

Created, by obsessive, vacuous, liars.

No Paedophiles.
(Yes, just like the media, in the UK, police are, invariably, incorrect, on this).

No Predators.
(See INTERPOL terminology).

No minors 'saved', that the police could not do so, more cheaply, safely and with authority.

>70 costly lives, to be paid for, by the state, in many cases, following, brief,
although expensive, incarceration.

>70 low-risk drains, on PPU units, taking time, money and effort, from, relevant, risk assessments.

>70 low-risk, men's lives, placed in danger.

Almost all, will not be 'Sex Offenders', within a few years.

Oh, and Sir James Savile OBE KCSG, is innocent and always will be.

Fantasists never learn, when they can only see, the tiny, self-centered, picture.


(Embedded Tweets - click date)

More details to follow.

(16) Shooting Fish In A Barrel / Low Hanging Fruit

Consider placing an open suitcase, full of banknotes, on a pavement, overnight, What would happen?


(17) Epilogue

This is an ongoing research project.

More to follow.


Always worth a watch ...

Friday 25 October 2013

Vigilante paedophile hunters dispense morally dubious justice 


More to follow.

1 comment:

  1. These so called "hunters" dont care about kids they sting ppl to stroke thier own massive ego's oh and some do it for fainacal gain too.
    99% of thier stings invole entrapping people with learning disabilities easy bait for them to catch. When are they going to realise they are doing more harm than good. Its time they got themselfs a real job.