The Creep Catchers are sure getting famous. They are a group of citizens who pose as minors and arrange a meet up with predators looking for under age sex. They claim to have a caught a bus driver and now claim to have caught a cop. I have a lot to say about this one and the police are having a press conference on the subject today.
First let me say that I think it is a good idea. Predators are certainly going to be more hesitant organizing up a hook up with a minor knowing it could be a set up and they could be filmed and chased by a motley crew of creep catchers. However, I do have some concerns and will point out that sometimes good ideas go bad.
My first impression when I saw the video of the alleged bus driver was just what are they trying to expose? The fact that the bus driver was gay or the fact that he likes to have sex with minors. From the video it was hard to tell. If they are trying to rally a lynch mob to go after the guy because he's gay then that isn't just wrong it is also unlawful.
Nobody likes pedophiles. Not even in prison. Speaking of which take a look at the photo in the Vancouver Sun article that was posted on the front page of today's Vancouver Province. The headline on the cover of the Vancouver Province read: To catch a creep. I'm sure everyone in the photo is too young to understand the quote or the diss.
Many years ago there was a quasy detective series on TV called To catch a thief. It was based on a reformed thief who started working with the police to catch other thieves. The full quote was it takes a thief to catch a thief. So the headline in the Province would imply it takes a creep to catch a creep. Take a look at the photo. They dont look like a group of law biding citizens to me. When I see that picture the first thing that comes to mind is, OK let's run these names through the CSO database and do a criminal record search. Bingo.
The Vancouver Sun article states Ryan LaForge is the president of the Surrey chapter of Creep Catchers. When you search his name on the CSO database the most recent altercation he has had with the law was possession for the purpose of trafficking. He was found guilty. Ryan was charged with possession for the purpose of trafficking in Surrey Sept 22 2009. Three years before the brutal drug related murder of Janice Shore.
Martin Luther King was right. The old law of an eye for an eye leaves everyone blind. Whalley crack dealers are no better than pedophiles. On that note I have a true story about Whalley crack dealers trying to pimp out a 14 year old girl. That was disgusting.
The other concern I have is entrapment. One of the articles said they had an under age girl go on an adult dating site and say she was 18. Then after a contact was made she would tell them she was younger than that. I'm an old man myself. Me hooking up with a girl in her 20's would be legal but creepy as f*ck. Nevertheless, how many of those creep catchers have been to a club and met a girl there who had fake ID and was pretending to be older than she really was. Luring someone in is not catching a predator. To catch predators they need to be on underage sites.
Then there's the question just what is under age. Up until recently the age of consent was 14. Old men from Idaho and Creston, BC were swapping young girls to become polygamist brides. 30 year old men were marrying 14 year old girls and it was entirely legal. The Conservatives finally brought the age of consent back up to 16. As far as I'm concerned that means if two 16 year olds fall in love and have sex, it's not a criminal offense it's no one else's business. If a 30 year old man has sex with a 16 year old girl, then yes that is creepy as f*ck, but I don't think it is illegal.
The Canadian Department of Justice web site states "The age of consent for sexual activity is 16 years. It was raised from 14 years on May 1, 2008 by the Tackling Violent Crime Act. However, the age of consent is 18 years where the sexual activity "exploits" the young person -- when it involves prostitution, pornography or occurs in a relationship of authority, trust or dependency (e.g., with a teacher, coach or babysitter). Sexual activity can also be considered exploitative based on the nature and circumstances of the relationship, e.g., the young person's age, the age difference between the young person and their partner, how the relationship developed (quickly, secretly, or over the Internet) and how the partner may have controlled or influenced the young person." If a predator seeks out someone on the Internet then it would appear the age of consent is raised to 18. However, if a group of creep catchers lures an adult on an adult dating site I'm not sure if that's the same thing. No doubt the court will if they haven't already, clarify the matter.
The bottom line is I think the creep catchers is a good idea but they need to do criminal record searches of their members just like every other volunteer organization and they need to stay away from adult dating sites and go after the guys who are looking for minors.
As for me, I don't go anywhere near that kind of stuff. I was totally creeped out when my daughter was in high school and her friends were getting fake ID to go to the Mirage. That creeped me out forever. The idea of going to a bar where there are patrons my kids age is nasty. A few years ago I went out for a beer with an old friend. The guy kept saying isn't the waitress hot over and over again. I finally looked up at her squinting and said she looks pretty young. She looks about my daughter's age. When you have a daughter it changes your perspective completely.
So are the Surrey Creep Catchers going to go after the crack dealers in Whalley pimping out 14 year old girls or are they just gonna keep slinging crack on the side? Are they the ones selling fentanyl pretending it's cocaine? Please advise.
Mind you if they caught Bill Fordy I'd sure give them the thumbs up.
Realted news on a pedephile ring in the UK:
Documents exposing UK pedophile ring missing
Pedophile-ring in U.K. Parliament - Washington Post
Thatcher’s Government Covered Up a VIP Pedophile Ring
Cyril Smith: the predatory paedophile protected by establishment
San Fransisco News: Seven California cops charged with sexual misconduct:
Speaking of cops, The Canadian Press is reporting that "Seven current and former San Francisco Bay Area police officers will be charged in a sexual misconduct scandal involving a teenager who was later arrested in Florida in an unrelated assault case, a prosecutor said Friday. The wide-ranging scandal surfaced in June when the teenager, who described herself as a prostitute, said she had sex with about 30 law enforcement officials in Oakland and elsewhere in the region."
"The teen said she had sex with four officers before she turned 18 and sometimes traded sex for protection from arrest or tips about planned prostitution stings."
Update: The Vancouver Sun is reporting that "An RCMP officer is in custody following a Surrey Creep Catcher sting that was broadcast live online on Wednesday night. Assistant Commissioner Brenda Butterworth-Carr made the announcement at a news conference on Friday afternoon."
2nd Update: Global is reporting that "RCMP say the suspect has been released following a judicial bail hearing and they will continue to liaise with Crown Counsel regarding charges. Mounties say the suspect remains suspended from duty." CBC is reporting that Surrey Creep Catchers aslo apologized for publically naming the wrong person after the sting.
Charges are pending. Interesting. No doubt they will try to cover it up. In addition to that I'm not sure what they can charge him with since he just met a girl in public. I guess that would depend on the conversation they had and if sex was mentioned. The thought of a cop meeting a 15 year old girl is indeed creepy as hell. However, unless he was propositioning her in their correspondence I'm not sure what they can charge him with.
Teen girls removed from home of Mountie in Creep Catchers sting. CTV News is reporting that "Two teenagers had been living at the house of a Mountie who became the subject of a Creep Catchers sting, a source told CTV News. The 14-year-olds had been living in the Mountie's house as home-stay students, but a source said the girls were removed."
CNKW is reporting that It appears the Surrey RCMP officer embroiled in an online sting by the Creep Catchers group isn’t the first public officer to be caught. The so-called Creep Hunters caught a Kamloops sheriff last month. In August, Steph was the decoy, a 14-year-old girl new to town, taking to Craigslist looking for someone to talk to. It wasn’t long before she says a member of the justice system responded." OK now that is creepy.
Update - Charges laid: The Peace arch News is reporting that Const. Dario Devic, that Surrey RCMP officer caught by Creep Catchers has been charged with child luring.
You are a special kind of stupid aren't you? They pose as under age no matter gay or straight. Try to keep up.
ReplyDeletePerhaps. But if they are just posing as minors and just meeting them without doing anything, how can any charges ever be laid since no crime was actually committed? Conspiracy to commit sex with a minor? I think it is very effective for outing people. I'm just not sure if the police are able to press charges. Has there been any creep catcher convictions yet?
Deleteit may be be legal for a 40 yr old to have sex with a 16 yr old in your laws but not mine nor gods
ReplyDeleteIt most certainly isn't my laws. I was outraged when the age of consent was 14 and lobbied my MP to raise it to 16. I agree a 40 year old man marrying a 16 year old girl is creepy. I certainly don't support it. Unfortunately those are the laws in Canada. That's why Canada was a pedophile playground when the age of consent was 14.
DeleteSo just what is the age of consent according to God? I know in the 1800's it was a lot younger than it is now. With the young mortality rate it was even worse in biblical times. Please advise.
nothing was mentioned about marriage i am talking about something quite different an rcmp officer attempting to seduce a 14 yr old is far more than creepy .If you want to know what the age of consent is according to god simply ask him.
DeleteI agree the laws of Canada now state that a 40 year old marrying someone under the age of 16 is illegal and I agree it should be. I just find it ironic how someone can support the sale of crack then mention the will of God in the same sentence when the people who sell crack in Whalley are also expliting under age minors.
DeleteWow you're seriously pointing your fingers at the people dedicating their free time to catching these creeps and disgusting weirdos?
ReplyDeleteComparing Ryan LaForge to a pedophile?
Agent K what is going on.....
I don't know what his possession for the purpose of trafficking charge involved but if he is selling crack in Whalley, then he is no better than a pedophile. If he was selling pot, no one cares about that. He has other criminal history as well. I think the intentions are good but the criminal history of those involved concerns me.
DeleteWe all make mistakes and unfortunately some of them haunt us for life and affect our prospects. Seems like he's channeling his energies in a positive direction. Now he has a purpose
DeleteI wish I could get a fresh start like a lot of the child soldier rapists and murderers we allow into the country
If he has stopped selling crack then more power to him. I'm not sure everyone in that crew has. It just sounds a lot like how things run outside the Front Room on the Surrey Strip. Help us give someone the boots or we will give you the boots.
DeleteDennis Watson the crime actually committed when a creep is meeting a minor is child luring. Actually even if an adult like you goes to an online dating site and a you're talking to a girl and she confesses that she just registered as 18 but actually is 14 and you continue to talk to her then you are committing child luring that can be reported to the police because you are violating the law.
ReplyDeleteYou are pointing out why there are no charges already pressed until now? Why would the burden of proof be with the CC? They are private individuals.they always present their chat logs to police they say they would not hold through for now because the law does not allow it. Lack of charges doesn't mean there is no violation of the law.
FYI entrapment is only applicable to local authorities. Check this up if you may. Any private individual is not subject to entrapment.
Your first paragraph is absolutely correct. I disagree with your definition of entrapment but I don't feel this case constitutes entrapment. As for charges, I'm just not sure how charges can be laid when no crime has been committed. I recently saw reference to a similar sting where the police did the exact same thing so perhaps it is possible. This is out of my jurisdiction so I'm just asking for clarification.
DeleteI don't want to knock them. As I said I think it's a good idea and the intentions are good. The drug trafficking charges concern me. I recognize there are other chapters and that not all members are drug traffickers.
A recent news article states the cop came to meet what he thought was a 15 year old girl. That is indeed messed up. We all know the RCMP is full of freaks from the sexual harassment class action lawsuit. Not all cops are bad but there is a huge problem in the RCMP that the powers that be refuse to address. Perhaps this will force them to.
There is something very odd about these "creep catchers". when they first appeared on t.v. "catching" a bus driver, one of them called out, "we caught a big one, a bus driver". Now if in your world a "bus driver" is a "big one", there is a problem. Catching the head of a major corp, the FIFA, U.N., cabinet minister of any country, the rest are fairly small potatoes in this world.
ReplyDeleteThe pictures of those who declare themselves to be "creepy catchers" are fairly creepy themselves.
What these people are doing is no different, in my opinion, than what the RCMP did with the young couple arrested for terrorism, from a legal perspective.
One of the "creepy catchers" advised he had "60 videos under his belt". Well if he did, not one of them seem to have led to an arrest or charges, etc.
What this all reminds me of is a really good way to make money by extortion/blackmail. These "creep catchers" might want to go out and get a job and do something useful in society. They aren't helping anyone. What they do will not lead to criminal charges for anyone they "out". My opinion, the "RCMP officer", will not be charged. There isn't any evidence he committed a crime. He may loose his job, but not even that is certain. All he has to say is he was checking into it all on his own time.
None of these actions will deter any one pursing sex with minor. Sending them to jail certainly hasn't so this won't either.
The creep catchers are very creepy and one of these days they are going to be sued, if they had anything to take.
In my opinion these creep catchers are simply glory hounds, they have nothing else to promote themselves as a positive influence in society. If they want to do something useful, pick up garbage in parks.
The reason a bus driver is significant is because they are always around kids. When you say catching the head of a major corp, yada yada yada. A bus driver or school teacher or counselor etc. Would be that exactly. So while your looking at this as them trying to say they caught a big fish and try and get famous type of thing, catching someone in this position is a huge catch and informs a lot of people about this person.
ReplyDeletemy interpretation of the comment was not so much in terms of the association with children, but rather that his being a bus driver was a big thing.
DeleteIn my opinion, these "creep catchers" are simply glory hounds looking to make themselves look better than they are. I'm still of the opinion they might want to get a job or do something useful with their lives. This "creep catcher" stuff, not so much.
HEY, they might want to patrol areas where addicts are being beaten up by dealers, etc. That of course would require a whole different set of skills and guts.
From an elsewhere conversation:
ReplyDeleteX said: "... this summer in Surrey alone Creep Catcheres has exposed over 70 child predators includinng an RCMP officer. If one child is saved then how can Creep Catchers be wrong?"
Wait. They have made 70 accusations. 70 CONVICTIONS would be impressive but 70 ACCUSATIONS is nothing.
We are never going to see convictions out of this. Never.
Creep catchers have built a legal loophole into their standard operating procedure that allows any true predator a valid legal defense.
The problem is, in order to convict someone of child luring the prosecution must be able to demonstrate they knew they were talking to a child. The bait and switch introduces a valid element of doubt: "She said she was 18, then she said she was 15."
Creep catchers go to adult sites, use adult pics on their profiles, initially present themselves as 18+ (that's the bait) and only after the target has engaged do they "confess" to being a minor (that's the switch).
You can be certain that the lawyers for the sheriff and police officer -- the two lone people who have actually been charged, out of the hundreds "accused" by creep catchers -- will be relying on the doubt introduced by the "bait and switch" as a legal defense for their clients.
This is part of the reason creep catchers has contributed to ZERO convictions in spite of being in operation for more than a year and boasting of catching hundreds of creeps.
IF we see a charge stick in either of those two cases it will only be because police MIGHT have gotten a search warrant to seize computers, etc. BEFORE either of those individuals were able to go home and dump it. And that's assuming they actually are guilty. They might not be.
For example, that police officer might have been there to pick up a pizza. He might have been set-up. We can't know. But hopefully a proper investigation will discover as much and establish their guilt or innocence one way or the other.
A second concern with the creep catcher approach is all those chat logs from those hundreds of catches. These are being posted online where I am sure any true predator is carefully studying them so they can learn to spot the flags.
Not only does this make it more difficult for police or parents to ever catch them the first time, it allows them to hone their predatory skills so they can escape detection.
Creep catchers are literally providing predators with a free online course so they can become BETTER predators.
Question: How does this make it safer for vulnerable teens?
Answer: It doesn't.
Here's the rub: Creep catchers are not going to give up the 'bait and switch'. They can't. It's what allows them to operate.
They CAN'T go into children's or teen's sites to pose as children or teens because they would then be guilty of child luring themselves.
Their only option is to go into adult sites and pull the bait and switch.
This is why we will NEVER see convictions out of this movement.