ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (7/10 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

Click here to sign up now for ACSOL’s Online EPIC Conference: Empowered People Inspiring Change Sept 17-18
Download a PDF of the schedule


Convicted of Sex Crimes, but With No Victims

[ –  8/26/20]

Jace Hambrick worked as an apprentice laborer during the week, renovating homes around Vancouver, Wash., and at a neighborhood gas station on weekends. Much of the rest of his life was online. He was hard-core, amassing a collection of more than 200 games. People told him it wasn’t smart to be so cut off from reality, but his internet life felt rich. As a dungeon master in Dungeons & Dragons, he controlled other players’ destinies. As a video warrior, he was known online by his nom de guerre and was constantly messaging fellow gamers, particularly his best friend, Simon. Though the two had never met in person, over the last few years they paired up as teammates playing Rainbow Six Siege and Rocket League and grew close.

At 20, Hambrick was still living at home with his mother to save money for college, where he hoped to study game design. He was a voracious reader who could knock off a 1,000-page fantasy novel in two days. People liked him; he made them laugh. When he and his mother lived in places that had board-game clubs, he was a regular. And his kindness could be surprising. He would spend a morning handing out sandwiches to the hungry.

Read the full article



We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
    1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
    2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
    3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
    4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
    5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
    6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
    7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
    8. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
    9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
    10. Please do not post in all Caps.
    11. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
    12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
    13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
    14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
    15. Please do not solicit funds
    16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
    17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
    18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

She told him she was 13 twice. This didn’t sound like some of the other stings where the LE is hounding the person despite them saying “no”.

But she wasn’t 13. We don’t make decisions based on demographic stats that people provide us in a dossier. We make decisions based on how people behave and the context they are in. No actual 13 year old would have been in this context, talking as she did. Given this man has never been accused of raping a 13 year old, we know exactly how he behaves around 13 year olds—he doesn’t rape them.

If you defend these stings then you defend the registry. Better safe than sorry, after all.

You’re making poor excuses. It doesn’t matter if she spoke like a 1920’s gangster. She explicitly said early on she’s 13. Making these excuses is just trying to convince yourself as to why it’s okay to keep going. It’s the same bullshit I used to say to myself every time I did something wrong that I knew was wrong.

This wasn’t the same kinda sting where the guy tries to cut it off after learning the person is underage but keeps getting hounded for months until they finally relent. Him continuing to communicate, then driving for hours and buying condoms, all on the belief that she was just kidding about her age due to the language she’s used, is an incredibly poor decision. This just shows cops don’t even need to do their job well to catch someone. People will jump through hoops for it.

If you are “conversating” about hooking up with a 30 year old cop pretending to be a 13/15/17 year old you are fully held responsible (for the rest of your life) about what you believe, regardless of the facts.

If you hook up with a 15/17 year old in a bar who is pretending to be of age – complete with a fake ID – you are fully held responsible (for the rest of your life) about the facts, regardless of what you believe.

If you recruit a 13/15/17 year old to sell drugs for you or to blow up a federal building, that 13/15/17 year old is fully held responsible, easily as an adult.


I’m not disagreeing with anything you’ve said. It’s total BS that the law arbitrarily decides when someone is “adult” enough to have done what they’ve done. But nothing you’ve said changes the fact that he chose to fully ignore the absolute biggest red flag one could possibly get in this situation. This wasn’t a fake ID at the bar trying to trick you. This is seeing the underage ID and choosing to ignore it because the picture looks more mature.

SR…ask any teenager why they would go into a chat room and claim they are of legal age. I asked my teenagers why teens lie about their age to be in a chat and I was told that teens claiming to be of legal age in a chat gives them freedom of speech. Which means they are not limited to what they can talk about. I myself have never used any form of social chat. However, if you are on a site that doesn’t allow minors to be on and an adult is on claiming to be a minor, yes wisdom should tell you to treat that warning as a red herrin, but Chat sites should be responsible to verify their customers using them when they are not of age. Not to mention an adult cop should not be claiming to be a minor, clearly as an adult they sound and would speak more like a mature adult than a teenager. In my simple opinion this is no different than alcohol and tobacco not being sold to someone under age. Big Question to me is if alcohol/tobacco is sold inappropriately and those businesses receive major fines then why are online sites not receiving fines when they allow underage persons on that claim they are 18 or older?

@SR @ Joe, what “underage ID” is it you speak of that the person ignored?

And how is it sane to say an individual of a certain age is not mature enough to choose the (biologically appropriate) sexual partner of their choosing, but the very same individual is not only mature enough to be held responsible for a, any crime, but so as an ADULT?

I guarantee you (kind of)…. only in the US of A is that possible.

I get what you’re saying but I think it presents a double standard when you consider how many people are convicted of sex crimes when the reverse occurs – an underage person lies and says they are older than they are. In most states there’s no defense to believing someone was the age of consent. The burden is on you to verify the person’s age. Therefore people get screwed both ways by the law – if an adult lies about being underage, the person is charged; if a minor lies about being an adult, the person is also charged. In one context (sting operations) the law focuses entirely on intent, yet in the other context (sex with a minor who lies about being an adult) the law ignores intent and focuses on the act. It’s a double standard and the state shouldn’t be able to have things both ways.

The only advice I can offer is that if you meet someone online, meet in a public place and ask to see their ID. Sometimes people are offended by my request to see their ID, but I’d rather lose a date than go to prison. There are other ways to verify someone’s age, such as via social media. The sting operations fall apart if you refuse to meet someone at their house and only agree to meet them in a public place like a mall or beach. The burden should not be on us to go to these lengths to verify people’s ages, but that is the wild west nature of the Internet and state laws right now.

The “underage ID” was her explicitly stating “I’m 13”. I’m not sure why people here are having such a hard time grasping this concept? What’s possible reason would a grown adult looking for companionship in whatever form, on an adult website, would then choose to ignore such a clear statement and continue to pursue the person? Not only continue to chat with them, but to then travel to meet them and buy condoms on the way.


I’m not particularly invested in this discussion and I didn’t read the details closely but I’ll throw this out – he didn’t believe she was 13. He didn’t think he was talking to a 13 year old or going to meet one. His beliefs and instincts were exactly correct. She was not 13.

People believe and do all kinds of things that none of us can really judge without being in their experiences.

Fuck big government. Because of their incessant lying and harassing, they should NEVER be believed. They should never be trusted. Do not support them. Defund it all.

Who cares what he believed and that he was right? She explicitly told him she was 13. Period. End of story. Move on to another person that isn’t claiming to be a very young minor.


Well, a smart person that has the right life experiences and skills, and who is in the right place and frame of mind in their life, without any mitigating issues that make it impossible to properly respond, would do exactly that and move on. EVEN if the person fully believed that the person was 30 years old. But I guess at this particular point in his life he just wasn’t as fortunate as the rest of us.

So maybe he is just another victim of lying, out of control big government? Or maybe he isn’t.

However, what he believed is everything and there is little else that is relevant. The criminal regimes imprison people for thought crimes, what they believe, and what they “intend”, even when in a lot of cases (like probably this one), the criminal regimes have no clue that they are 100% wrong. So if you are convicting people based on what they believe, then I feel you need to have to prove that is what they believe. If you say “he thought that person was 13”, then you have to prove it. And the proof is obviously not that she told him. That may have even caused him NOT to believe she was 13. So it’s all shaky. And it’s shaky because these pigs would rather do easy, sit-at-a-computer-and-play-games, brag-about-PR-stunts-to-the-media, get-money “work” instead of actually having to prevent and solve real crimes that actually harm real people.

I don’t know your history (and forgive me for being too busy/lazy to try to figure it out right now), but you sound an awful lot like a big government boot licker. There will be enough Registry Supporters/Terrorists piling onto stories like these. Maybe if you don’t think the person can be defended, just let it slide?

It’s logical to assume someone on an adult site who has sent a picture of an adult and is clearly looking for an adult to hook up with might be playing games and not being honest about everything.
It’s difficult to believe that any 13 year would be on an adult site looking for random adult strangers to hook up with and voluntarily giving out their “minor” age. That just doesn’t happen. 🤦🏻‍♀️ A real minor in an adult place would be lying about their age, making themself an adult age.
A minor would definitely know they are on adult site because you have to click to accept that you are an adult. So, they wouldn’t be there “accidentally”.

I was in an online adult chat room after life threw me a curveball thinking I was talking with over 18 year olds; however it turned out I was a cop. After awhile she told me that she was 15 and I thought why would a 15 year be in an adult chat room. Every time I tried to end the conversation the cop kept calling me a chicken. These stings should never occur the cop gets a promotion and I get a price club membership; while thinking this country IS the worst.

That is exactly what happened to me, I was convicted of 288.4 (b) and the undercover cop looked like she was 35. She told me she was 15 and I told her if she had an older sister or relative over 18 and then she called me out on being a b*tch for not showing up. I was stupid and yes I made a mistake I told her I would not meet at her house but I agreed to meet at a park near the bleachers but that we would not have to do anything sexual. When I showed up, I saw her at a distance at the bleachers and I turned around not ever making contact and went back to my car when I was arrested.

I took a plea deal as advised by my lawyer, with the false illusion that I could get off the registry one day. Now it seems like I will be a Tier 3 and cannot reduce it to a misdemeanor. No physical contact, no victim, no illegal images found. I know I messed up and I accept that I have to pay the consequences of my stupidity, I regret what I did and I assure that I won’t do it ever again, I am not interested in children but that is what society will forever think of me now. I only got probation but I would have taken Jail if it meant no registration for life and the only reason probation was granted was because the Stat-99 was “moderate-low”.

Luckily my family supports me, and I have tried to move on the best I can, I have a lovely wife, and a 6 month old which is my only motivation for living in this world. My relationship with my then gf at the time of my arrest was broken but this actually motivated me to reconcile and fix all the issues I had with her, which I ended up marrying and having a child with. The most unfortunate part of this is that she is paying the consequences for something I and only I committed, even after my arrest she was willing to give me a second chance and now we are stronger together than we ever were. I really hope my child does not have to go through the embarrassment of someone finding her father is on the sex offender registry though I am not a child predator, no prior criminal history I will still be seen as a monster. I try to stay positive because so far, I have a lot to be thankful despite this I still have a job and still providing for my family I pray I can remain stable. I am trying to be the best father I can be and the best husband I can be because my family does not deserve to pay for something I did wrong.

I trust you won’t be upset to know that for what you did, however stupid it may have been, the handy dandy Tiered Registry Bill will place a 288.4 (b) in Tier 3 – aka “the worst of the worst” – for the rest of your life. Without any way of getting off. While someone who has done something truly terrible 20 years ago will be getting off the registry. This is the bill that ACSOL supported.

Good luck with that job and that family support.

@Joe, you should check your facts before making slanderous statements. The fake “fact” you stated keeps echoing around, so I want to address it.

ACSOL did NOT support the reincarnated version of the current tiered registry. ACSOL supported the original version that didn’t have the toxic CP stuff, among other poison that was added IN SECRET BEHIND CLOSED DOORS!

To refresh your memory, a certain politician who hates us killed the bill in her committee, then within a matter of hours, Gov. Brown told her in closed-door meetings to reincarnate it. We don’t know how he did that, but in the process she made horrible modifications that ACSOL NEVER KNEW ABOUT MUCH LESS SUPPORTED.

I hope this addresses your misplaced anger towards ACSOL.

@Roger – please refresh my memory as to where ACSOL opposed SB 384 at any point in time. Ever. At any point. In time. At the point of latest modification, at the least. I will gladly re-evaluate my position.

I have no anger toward ACSOL. Disappointment, perhaps, but hardly anger. There are more people being sacrificed at the altar of the Tiered Registry than those convicted of CP – who seem to be the only people ACSOL is intent on “saving”. I wonder why that is. I am talking about people who have done much less. People like @AJP.

Yes, please address my concerns. And how my comment is slanderous. Especially if you speak for the organization. Do. I will gladly retract.

@Joe – You are wrong. ACSOL did not support the final version of Senate Bill 384, the Tiered Registry Bill. Instead, that version of the bill was passed as a political compromise of which we had NO part. Get your facts straight before you attack ACSOL. The proof that ACSOL didn’t agree with the final version of Senate Bill 384 is that we have lobbied every year since its passage to change it. Perhaps if you had participated in our lobbying efforts you would have known that. It’s not too late to join us. We will return to the State Capitol next year and every year after that until we get what we want. It took almost 7 years to end the lifetime registry for all. It may take us another 7 years or even longer to get a Tiered Registry Bill that is fair and based on facts, not myths.

@Janice Bellucci,

The way I remember it was that ACSOL, one hundred percent, supported SB 421. Even took credit for it, to some extent while it lasted. Under that bill there always were plenty of people going to be stuck in Tier 3. And apparently that was fine.

When SB 421 died and rose from the ashes as SB 384, in a legislative maneuver that seems strange to the amateur but apparently is not uncommon, nothing fundamentally changed, except some additional people were going to be added to Tier 3. Including those convicted of felony CP.

Then, and only then, did it become unacceptable. But in essence, it is a few more people and a few more offenses that are assigned Tier 3. Hardly a radical change.

Why is that. As long as one person was going to have to register life-time – or at all, it should be a no-go. As long as convicted murderers are not subject to registration, it should a no-go. But all of a sudden, ACSOL no longer supports the bill. SB 421 – awesome. SB 384 – an outrage.

Much has been said and written about how unjust the final bill is – after months of supporting essentially the same bill. Only because it now includes people convicted of felony CP. Not a peep about people like @AJP with a 288.4, or several other offenses that boggle the mind.

I have before wondered publicly, on this site – why the focus on CP and no mention of a number of other offenses, like @AJP’s. Far be it from me to suspect a self-serving motive….

Massaging the registry implies approval for its concept and existence. Putting lipstick on a pig does not make it anything but a pig – a pig with lipstick but a pig nevertheless. If you are looking for a registry that is fair and based on facts instead of myths, the first and perhaps only registry should be a registry for drunk drivers. And newsflash – the bill ACSOL supported was neither fair nor based on facts. What facts? What fairness?

I thank you for your invitation but I will spend neither my time nor my resources on an effort that makes an unconstitutional scheme a bit more palatable for a select group while throwing countless others under the proverbial bus. If that metaphor has ever been appropriate it is in this case. If you have a plan to abolish the whole thing I am all ears.

I did not attack ACSOL, I merely stated facts. It was @Roger who accused me of slander and anger – without any foundation.

Please do not mistake my difference in opinion and perspective for lack of appreciation for all your efforts overall. But! At the end of the day…. justice for some is no justice at all.

I had the same thing happen with me, I feel your pain. 288.4(b) Never ask for anything sexual or even talked about it.

Dear Joe:

“Massaging the registry implies approval for its concept and existence. Putting lipstick on a pig does not make it anything but a pig – a pig with lipstick but a pig nevertheless.”

I understand your anger and your bitterness.

However, you are wrong in reference as to a full frontal attack on the Registries is the proper approach.

No, I hate to say this, but bringing cases against the Registry will, at the moment, most probably just reaffirm the terrible burdens placed on us as being civil, regulatory and not punishment.

With such rulings we will be in a worse place and the politicians might even be emboldened to go back and give full presence restrictions another try. Things can be worse for us and believe me when I say for lots of people, they want it worse for us. Really.

Janice and team is doing what is possible. We have had several court reversals recently, (see 10th Circuit), and don’t need any more.

Janice, (and many of us) spoke out (insofar as we could in the short time and secrecy that this was done in) against the changes made suddenly and without our approval in the modified Tiered Legislation.

You are just wrong…which is of course your right…(grin)

Best Wishes, James I

PS I am as depressed as anyone by our current state of affairs…I just have no real, and potentially successful, answers at the moment.

Thank you for sharing, I am sorry that happened to you. I agree, as very educated man, you may have indeed made some kind of mistake here, but according to your words you seemingly made right choices, including turning around. but you correctly point out that you have been cursed for life. You have, and that is entirely wrong. I’ve seen it before in other crimes, once damned, you are damned. You keep your chin up, and keep fighting the fight. God knows your heart, your mistakes, your amends. Let the judgemental ones answer to God for their judement about things they do not know but assume.

I have a few questions if you don’t mind. Thank You.

Sorry I did not see this sooner, but sure I can answer some questions you may have.

It doesn’t matter if there was an actual biological immediate victim or not. The result was another life ruined by the registry. The courts always side with LEOs on these stings claiming the subject satisfied “means, motive and opportunity for a POTENTIAL victim” through willful knowledge and follow-up.

This article will garner little – if any – empathy and outrage from NYT readers.

Instead, the media should attack the unfairness and misguided intent of the registry, not cherry-picking people for interviews who think they should not be on it.

The registry is trash. But his actual prosecution was proper. He wasn’t prosecuted because of the registry. Registering is a terrible side effect of it.

Aside from the registry. How is it proper to prosecute a person for having a conversation about a sexual relationship with a minor, but having a conversation with the same minor about a crime (i.e. blowing up a federal building) sees the minor prosecuted, and quite possibly and probably so as an adult. How is that possible. And then the registry.

Why was his prosecution proper? Because, lacking any evidence for having committed a sex crime, his acts indicate a propensity to commit a sex crime, and the state has a compelling interest in finding and monitoring people like that? That’s the rationale for the registry.

How’s it any different than being caught in a drug or gun buying sting? It’s not like if the registry didn’t exist it would suddenly be okay to meet 13-year-olds hours away, with condoms in your pocket.

Registries aside, I have personally have a difficult time with these stings. On one hand nobody should be trying to hook up with underaged girls and as soon as they have that information should be terminating the conversation and refusing to re-engage. So from that standpoint anyone so engaging after knowing that age should have some sort of consequence. Where I have trouble with it is how there is no actual person who exists that is that age. In this case you are saying that someone is intending to do an act which is impossible in the presented circumstances. With most other kinds of stings except these sex ones – which many I don’t agree with either different reasons – the act was at the very least possible to carry out.

Maybe? If it’s a drug or weapon sting, do the cops really bring with them 30 kg of cocaine or a hundred active weapons? Or is it just the few ounces and a pair of guns to try out? Maybe to those things they really do technically make the real amount fully available, but that seems dangerous and unlikely unless they mean to track it like the failed Fast and Furious sting.

These types of stings are problematic because they are designed like a large fishing dragnet with the intent of scooping up as many as possible, and like a fishing drag net, a lot of collateral carnage is created.

The adage, “to a hammer, everything looks like a nail” applies here. LE are looking for predators, so they will interpret everything that happens in a sting with the presumption that every target must be one. They can’t fathom that they have been manufacturing predators all along in most cases. No doubt a few genuine baddies are out there, and occasionally they may get caught by these stings, but why needlessly destroy so many lives in the process?

I believe that what is happening now with BLM will eventually reach the registrant community. When millions of additional families are harmed, when the harm has continued unabated long enough, the oppression will reach a critical mass, prompting an unstoppable response.

Where is the best place to find info on where we are at woth oit all the BS? I just want the facts of the current climate and decisions (if any) i have one 4th degree high court mis and one 3rd degree ellony . was incarcerated in i think 2005 for 8 yrs…then parole where i managed to escape Michigans impossible atipulations by hording a second phone and finding a wife in another state. Married 5 yrs and in the Texas area but on a regestry here that has red letters posted in two places on my feicking ID! I was in my 20s upon conviction…now late 40s and folks dont sew that, they see registrants as if they commited the alleged offence this year… Now 46 its no longer cute and Im becoming to the public eye no less than a creepy older dude who needs to be shunned and shut down at every possibility of succeeding! This S#!$ is so frustrating! I just want to mive on! Ironicly now, im divorced and have been serious with a woman who is a lawyer working for the Norigan government and who practiced family law for 10 yrs. She said her country would NEVER do a registration and is appalled by its effect(s)… Now the truth comes out 3 months ago…my girlfriend is mow backing out on over 2 years of very serious and (what i thought) real relational plans for our lives to merge do to the fear factor that she is afraid will affect her career! Now what??? Is a person with 1 fellony and one high cort misdemeanor a lifer? If so ill pull the trigger i cant keep living between these freaking cracks Im to old and to smart to be stuck im a menial life just “gettin by!”

Im not happy and my life keeps stopping do to this ridiculous false security ploy… I guess the state has some staying on some coming off do to convict date? Ok…im confused as to the cut off point. Im im prison as of 2005 so can someone help me untangle this maze of laws and more laws… Im so tired of this and a lot of you are to sounds like! Jesus man… Bullies in the capitol need to have a reality check and statistics course ran past them prior to running for office. Whats best for all defenately IS NOT to scare the sheeple into paying for a broken “solution.’

Little known fact that in most states (if not all), LE is specifically precluded from using minors in undercover operations. Accordingly, every LE officer that takes part in these stings should be prosecuted for using minors in their operation, elevated for those that led and ordered them. That there was no actual minor shouldn’t be any more a defense to them than for the target of the operation.

A side note, I see don’t see the reasoning of how a legitimate child predator would be trolling adult sites and chat rooms on the off chance of meeting a minor. I would think they would be far more likely to be trolling sites and chat rooms geared toward children. Wouldn’t it make more sense to try these stings from there? Just sayin’…

Let’s just say government agencies have and continue to collaborate on operations where all sorts of at minimum underhanded tactics are used. Forget pretending to be minors under eighteen, certain efforts actually take over and boost traffic on sites filled with CP. One case resulted in maybe a few hundred arrests around the world, but thousands of people gaining access to far more CP than they would have without a government boost. In response government agencies were like “yeah we gave a lot more people access to stuff, but we caught more people too.” Which reasonable people would look at the actual numbers and ask “this was worth it?”

Laws are bent and twisted routinely often in opposite directions for different purposes simultaneously in places far apart while in other places justifications are thrown around for following the law or procedure. The whole protecting and serving the public is at best overblown and worst not the reality many times. Yet under the best circumstances few options are available for proving an alternative narrative holds greater validity than what is presented by prosecutors. More unfortunate still is they are so obscure or narrow the defense doesn’t know let alone attempt to make such arguments in court filings.

It’s funny how this article tried to paint him as a good guy who was misled by LE but come on man this dude set himself up the picture the cop sent looked like a old ass lady cop.
It’s obvious this guy has autism or something but I’m not buying this por guy BS he knew what he was doing he had a long time to think about it while driving over there did he follow his gut feeling and stop the car and turn around no he stop to buy condoms this dude deserves to suffer hell on earth with the rest of the people forced to register.
I dont support these stings I think its enticement while interacting online and entrapment once the defendant shows up.
Just because there was no real minor involved during the sting dont mean your charges should be lesser then someone who’s case does involved a minor.
Dont get me wrong their both sick individuals I’m not justifying their actions I’m just saying
The difference between someone arested for trying to meet a 13 year old online and the guy who actually had sexual contact with a minor is the premeditation and the Great Lengths the online defendant gose through while attempting to commit these crimes .
If a guy comes home from work and finds his wife having an affair in his bed flips out grabs his gun and shoots the guy dead in court this calld a crime of passion but if he finds his wife cheating gets in his car drives 2hours to his parents house steals his dad’s gun drives 2hours back stops to buy ammunition on the way then finds the guy and kills him that’s premeditated murder in the first degree it’s not that one crime is greater then the other it’s just the premeditation and preparation the defendants go threw while committing their crimes.
Also its almost impossible to defend someone when you can read their true intentions word for word thrue back and forth text messages.

Good luck

Again, I’ll comment without knowing that much about it. 🙂 Hey, I’m just acting like the average American. I know nothing yet have an opinion.

But you said it yourself … the person “looked like a old ass lady”. The guy said he didn’t believe she was 13. He was right. No one was 13 and he was not going to meet a 13 year old. He was going to meet an adult who was playing a game. And he thought he might have sex with her.

Meh. Never trust pigs. Never trust big government. They are always an enemy.

Sting operations remind me of European Vacation.. oink, oink we’ll be pigs. Americans were sold a pig in a poke when it comes to the registry!!

The people running these stings never report a single case where any guy calls the cops alerting them that a teen girl is in danger of sexual assault. Isn’t that amazing? The BEST you can hope for is “as soon as I found out she was 13 I blocked her.” What chivalry! Truly, we live in an age of heroes valiantly defending the honor of young maidens! Tens of thousands
of stings, hundreds of thousands of interactions between internet users and “vulnerable teen” catfish and not a single notable case where anyone took 5 minutes to alert the authorities there was a girl on the verge of being raped? It’s almost as if NO ONE CARES about these “teens” and it’s simply an excuse to hate people because that’s fun! Which is why America will go on hating all of us, as sex offenders, and frankly we deserve it because we’re horrible hypocrites.

@Confused Man, LE is mostly a reactionary force rather than a proactive force even though we have been sold the fact that they are supposed to be there to keep everyone safe. For example, it doesn’t really do much good to arrest someone after they committed assault when the person assaulted is now already injured from the assault. Arresting them and putting them into Jail or Prison does nothing to keep that person safe after the injury occurs. I think you’d be hard pressed to find any cop who would do anything about a report that a 13 year old is trying to find older men on social media or on a dating site. If the goal is to keep our kids safe, they should do this sort of proactive thing to try and prevent crimes against real people from even happening in the first place. Instead they are almost purely reactive. They only want to charge and prosecute things that have already happened in order to put people in prison. In stings, they are doing this with a fake victim but its still not proactive, it’s reactive to the crime of intention having been already committed. The sad reality is that the police are not here to make anyone safe. They actually need that 13 year old to be “victimized” in order to actually be able to do anything about it. Obviously some of the police being reactionary is because of our constitutional rights but I’m of the opinion that helping to prevent the crime in the first place, by being a proactive force, so they aren’t actually making very many arrests is much more useful to society overall. The arrests would happen only if the proactive work didn’t accomplish its goal. In the end the police need to be both proactive and reactionary but they should be more proactive than reactionary and I think this is partly what BLM is calling for when it comes to such police interactions. It’s not going to be fixed though because there is not enough money to be made by people in law enforcement by being reactionary, that money would go to other kinds of services instead that wouldn’t provide any benefits to LE overall.

As I see sting operations, they are assuming a lot of stuff that never gets proven.

Maybe the adult is trying to stop the juvenile by talking to them

Maybe the adult is going to get a face to face and report the juvenile to the authorities

There are a lot of scenarios that they seem to ignore in order to say they caught a predator.

I speak from experience, because I had proof that I had actually reported the person that had included CP in a file I downloaded. It didn’t seem to make a difference in my conviction though. My attorney said that the D.A. felt I had done that to “cover my ass”. Even though the CP was obtained by police from a call by computer repair service during a file cleaning 3 yrs after originally trashed. Again, assuming the worst about someone and ignoring the facts and possibilities in order to obtain a simple conviction. And people wonder why I’m so bitter and depressed all the time.

I can imagine how this guy feels.

I have never dealt with these types of situations, so I am probably not the best person to comment. I have a hypothetical question, however. It looks like these dating sites can be accessed by anyone, and nobody really monitors or confirms the person’s age, despite the fact that it is supposed to be for adults only? So, let’s say the cops do a sting on a person who answers to an underage person (who again is not really supposed to use this site). They then lure the person to come and meet the person they are interested in to arrest them when they show up. What if the person who responds to the ad is also an underage person and gets a ride to meet the person on the other end? The cops open the door and see the 13 year old (or whatever age). Wouldn’t the cops have to be held accountable that they lured an underage person to have sex with them? Just wondering, or will there be the typical double standard that they did not know the person was under age, or didn’t care to really confirm this?

@someonewhocares. Double standard but totally legal. The courts have generally upheld that the police can break the laws they are trying to enforce in order to enforce them. Its not any different really than in United States v. Russell where it was upheld that law enforcement can supply illegal precursors to making methamphetamine to someone else manufacturing it in order to catch them. Or State v. Rowan (Ohio 1972) where it was upheld that officers could smoke marijuana so they could give the appearance of validity. While what you are talking about is somewhat different from these examples the public authority defense generally permits police to engage in otherwise illegal conduct if it is for legitimate law enforcement purposes. As such, the fact that this could happen may make the police conduct unethical but certainly not illegal and police have never been poster children of being ethical have they?

Actually, “legitimate” enforcement of laws contradicts the nature of sting operations. The people caught are only guilty of breaking the law because the scheme is intended to force that outcome. And they are getting very creative now, with sites such as NextDoor posing as a “community-oriented” social network that allows people to circumvent the Megans law warning page about using the information to harass people. Which then promotes vigilantism and the use of “community policing” as a cover. Funny, Megan’s law sill isn’t enough for the police and district attorneys. For them it’s about keeping the knife in the wound, they just want to use the sex offender agenda as the attack vector to manipulate the public opinion and laws at will.

Even though there are people who are on the registry only because the law demands it, despite being falsely accused and wrongfully convicted or convicted of petty acts that the prosecutors need to dress-up in order to look the part to the public.

There’s a comment on the page about how unethical these stings are and asks would it be alright to do the same thing to a homeless shelter or a rehab facility and have a plain clothes undercover drug dealer try to catch some of them. And that’s probably the best form of logic to apply to the whole sex offender agenda.

Sexofenders not aloud in the house of GOD wow how hypocritical whatever happened to love your neighbor dont judge people and treat others as you would like to be treated is that unless your a homosexual or even worse a sexofender in that case then you can phuckoff and I hope you burn in hell and your lil dog too.
First off if your going to church to be accepted by people then maybe you shouldn’t be at church in the first place the only person you should be seeking approval from is GOD not some Pastor or his church congregation.
The church is full of hippocrates remember the last time JESUS was in church he got so piss off about all the hippocrates in GOD’S house he started flipping over tables and chanceing people out of the church…

Good luck


I’ve been to enough meetings to know that ACSOL’S ultimate goal is to abolish the Registry. What is misunderstood so often is that the Tier Registry is not the ultimate goal but a means to push for the ending of the Registry. There was just no way at that time or even now to topple SORNA. The national and political narrative at this time is that we are considered a danger to society. Look at the news…how do the media portray us?

Until the national and political narrative changes about Registrants and SORNA, we can at best make incremental changes to our justice system. The Tier Registry was only the beginning…and yeah it has some changes in it I’m not crazy about , for example I have a CP charge and that puts me in Tier 3….

Which BTW, ACSOL has been petitioning Sacramento to create an off ramp for Tier 3 a few months ago. You may have missed that one. Either way, unless you have a better and faster plan to end the Registry we have to work with what we got.

1. NYT? What role , if any, did the Times play in the Kanka Case? Hype! that resulted in Megan’s Law statutes. Clearly Hyperbole sells papers and gets clicks. Victimhood is profitable so why not advance the cause? Take a good look at everyone, including cops, embracing their own victimization. Democrats are victims of Republicans AND Republicans claim to be victims of Democrats! Spiraling down we go round and around and around again. Soon the only good guy is the indifferent.

They created hell and now it’s untouchable. They’ll make it 10x worse before making it slightly better. Especially near an election.

The most important lesson here is that these things are orchestrated. Being public figures and politicians they all have a calendar on their desk. Ten or twenty years of registration time is a lot of legislative time. So in other words the system is built to outlast YOU and anybody that would try to fix it. Registrants now coming off their 20 years gave Biden the opportunity to build up support just in time to take another crack at the rso agenda. Only this time it’ll be followed through by prosecutor in chief Harris and the legion of emotional voters and “victim’s advocates” that 20-30 years of CSI fear mongering can bring.

Similar to my situation, except I actually told the “girl” that I suspected they were a cop. It didn’t matter, they came to my house and arrested me anyway. I was eventually forced into a plea because it became overwhelmingly clear I would never be able to beat the case after they withheld discovery for over two months, then when we got it, the photos were different and the chat text had been altered.

That was the same with my boyfriends military sting case. The texts had been altered and they actually wiped the iPad they used for the sting before the trial and only used print outs (screen shots) The text on the print out was different than the texts on his phone that they took. Of course on their end it was altered to look worse. Didn’t matter to the “system”.
The picture they sent was the same as what he had- obvious twenty something with a huge visible tattoo on her arm. No attempt to make her look younger or anything. Didn’t matter to the “system”.
And same with him- he didn’t show up anywhere for anything, they arrested him anyway for talking on the adult site. They said it was all justified because they were protecting children, even if he mistook the age of an adult who didn’t even bother to act younger for exactly what it was… an adult. Didn’t matter to the “system”.
I’m finding out that it almost never matters to the “system”. It’s like Richard Jewel’s story- the cops will create whatever kind of narrative fits their liking and will get them more funding and accolades. There isn’t any protecting or caring about real children.

@ Laura. You know I sort of like your comment to SR. Ask a teenager WHY they were in an adult chat room. Sure Laura its the indepth thought from a persons teenage view that makes one want to understand a bit more about who’s trying to get one’s goat with much of this ordeal. One wonders today with this internet garbage who gets abused, the victim or the abuser.

Even Paul Harvey made a lot of sense in his commentary, and Laura you do also. Sure I got caught up in this. I could of went to prison, been on the registry for life. They can call me in denile if they’d like but truth comes out in the long run.

Sure I say a person on an adult site that had the screen name of 15 year old lookign to chat. It was obvious I was on a sex site but I wanted to investigate this 15 yr old see what the heck was up. First thing I did was caution the person and wanted to warn the person that they were on an adult website chat room. That didn’t faze them a bit and they were justifying themselves in an I don’t care type ruse. Didn’t sound very good the response they gave me. I ask to talk to them via telephone and they agreed. Oh yes they badgered me to come down and meet. The bible says to test the spirits amd that was my intent. Actually who know’s the thoughts and intent of another.

They were lookimg to throw the book at me. In short the officer that arrested me had the guilt complex and offered me a plea deal. He even winked at me in a cunning way. Oh yes they in their coy way ask me for pictures, condoms and things of that physical nature but one knows what they were up to if one listens well. Yes I went down to meet this suppose teen but but on the way down their was a phone call from this person asking me why it was taking me so long. Right then and their I asdked to back out but they pursuaded me mroe. Ordeals like this for any guy to go thru are confusion and a bit of devilish work.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x