I would rather believe a police officer over some 41 year old guy who gets his rocks off chatting to young boys.
Well then, lock up the bastard. No need for a trial or any such foolish time wastage.
SS
Police Track Down Alleged Internet Predator
by Yizuman 24 Replies latest jw friends
-
Satanus
-
Uzzah
So far most of the conversation has been about the legality of the charge itself and methods used. SO I am not sure why the leap.
No-one has suggested that he shouldn't be tried for the charge. But anyone who has spent time in a court room knows that when it comes to conflicting testimony, a judge (or jury) has to make a determination of who is the more credible witness.
Unless there is evidence to show otherwise, courts do tend to believe a cop's testimony over the accused. The accused usually has a greater motive to lie.
-
Bendrr
I can see where Ty is coming from. Going strictly on the info in the article, it kinda comes across to me as overzealous cops.
But....
What would have bothered me a whole lot more though would be for this guy to get off and a year later cops find kids' bodies buried in his back yard. Please pardon me for being graphic, but you get my point.
Did they jump the gun? Was it entrapment? The article just didn't give me enough info to come down solidly on Ty's side. How did the cops get on this guy's trail? What were the two felonies? Maybe they found kid porn. Maybe some parent was being vigilant and went to the cops, thus leading to their investigation.
At this point, even though I'm not entirely comfortable with what the article told me, I don't feel sorry for the guy.
Mike.
-
Satanus
Uzzah
The accused usually has a greater motive to lie.
True, he has everything to lose. Here is a list of reasons for cops to lie:
1. To get a conviction.
2. To advance their careers.
3. To be seen doing something.
4. To calm the public.
5. To conclude/close a case.
6. Ego tripping.
7. To keep/increase funding levels for the department.
8. To get somebody.
SS
-
Yizuman
Interesting how 2 sides looks at this issue and I can see valid arguements from both sides.
I am feeling mixed about all this....one hand shows that he backed out from actually want to meet a child and he did state that he wasn't going to ruin his life over a child, but also got red flagged that he was talking to a cop so he fled the scene and went to NY where they found him and took him to jail.
He didn't actually commit a REAL crime, but the only crime he ever committed was fantasizing it, so was it a "thought police" at work? If so, what else can we go to jail for just by "thinking about it"?
But on the other hand, could the cops have prevented this perp from committing a crime against a child in the future even thought he may have never actually (yet) touched a child?
Yiz