I would tend to agree with you, but I read a very good article on this whole debacle in Esquire a few months ago. The issue here is that NBC clearly interjected into the police aspect of things and really caused the inexperienced police men that were on the case and helping out to push forward. From what I understand when they found out he was a lawyer they were like, “I don’t care what happens, we have to get this guy on camera.” When he stopped talking to the decoy and refused to setup a meeting (the whole premise to the show is the perp comes to the decoy house for a meeting), CBS went out to him with a rushed warrent instead of letting the law work it out. While I certainly have no sympathy for a pedophile as I feel they deserve none, this was a unique case. I would say that NBC acted wrecklessly to obtain a story for ratings, and this resulted in a man’s death. He did not commit suicide until they got to the house. While his guilt played a part, I would say that NBC’s wrecklessness was the proximate cause of his suicide. I am sure I will be blasted as having sympathy for a pedophile, but I don’t. I do however feel that CBS crossed a line.
Dustin, I read similar articles and drew much the same conclusions. Normally you don’t have a full SWAT team go in after somebody who is not considered to be armed and dangerous. Normally you would send out a couple officers and do it as quietly as possible.
I’m going to get blasted for the rest of this. I wish to preface that I believe killing is too good for sexual predators of any age or gender, but killing is the best I think we can do (even though we don’t).
He was a SUSPECTED pedophile. I have a big problem with releasing the names of suspects in sexual crimes while hiding the alleged victim. There are too many cases, high profile cases (remember Duke University anyone?), of false accusation of sex crimes. Even if proven guilty the accused’s life is forever damaged and it is extremely rare for the accuser to be tried – even though false accusation is a felony. The suspects and the victims should be out of the spotlight unless and until proven guilty. If the suspect is proven guilty, paste their face across the nation and then kill them. If the suspect is proven innocent, hide them forever and paste the name of the accuser across the nation, then lock them up.
I have no sympathy for those that prey on others, but I do have sympathy for those whose lives are ruined needlessly. I’m surprised there haven’t been more suicides due to the “To Catch a Predator” series. I think the only reason we haven’t seen them before is because they normally only air the ones that show up to the house and it’s hard to blow your brains out when you have four cops sitting on you. I’m not a fan of lawsuits, but I hope they win this one because we need to change how we do business.
Accuser in Jason Kidd Sexual Battery Case Loses Her Bid for Anonymity
Noeleen G. Walder
New York Law Journal
February 29, 2008
Printer-friendly Email this Article Reprints & Permissions
An aspiring model’s request to keep her identity under wraps in a sexual battery suit she filed against basketball star Jason Kidd has been denied by a Manhattan judge.
The woman’s desire to avoid “embarrassment” is a “plainly insufficient” ground for invoking New York Civil Rights Law 50-b, which protects the privacy of alleged sexual offense victims, New York State Supreme Court Justice Carol Edmead held in Jane Doe v. Jason Kidd, 116541-07.
Using fictitious names “runs afoul” of the public’s right of access to judicial proceedings, and anonymity should be restricted to situations where a plaintiff faces a “risk of retaliatory physical or mental harm,” the judge said.
She noted that Kidd was not charged with a crime, and that the woman’s representatives have themselves sensationalized her case by speaking to the press and “openly” disparaging Kidd.
“[P]laintiff’s voluntary identification of a … famous basketball player, in her pleadings, and to the press, undermines” her purported need for anonymity, the court ruled.
Kidd allegedly encountered the 23-year-old woman on Oct. 10, 2007, at Tenjune, a nightclub on Little W. 12th Street in the Meatpacking District of Manhattan.
According to the decision, the woman accused Kidd of grabbing her buttocks and “crotch.”
The October incident came just three months before Kidd’s rocky personal life attracted widespread media attention when he filed a restraining order against his estranged wife.
His career also has been in flux. Less than two weeks ago, he was traded from the New Jersey Nets to his original draft team, the Dallas Mavericks.
Following the nightclub encounter, the alleged victim filed suit, claiming Kidd acted “reckless[ly]” and caused her to reasonably fear that she would suffer “immediately harmful or offensive contact.” The woman also maintained that the alleged battery caused her ongoing physical and mental damage, which has interfered with her employment and other activities.
The plaintiff argued that she should be permitted to bring the suit anonymously under New York Civil Rights Law §50-b, which prevents the “public inspection” of court files, photographs and other documents “that name a victim of a sexual offense.”
Edmead disagreed. While legislative history generally only is used to resolve “ambiguous” statutory language, “in this case, the intent of the framers … is critical as to the intended covered individuals,” the judge noted.
Section 50-b “serves two important purposes,” the judge wrote: to shield victims from the embarrassment of media coverage and to “encourage victims to cooperate in the criminal prosecution of sexual offenses.”
PRESUMPTION OF OPENNESS
Here, however, the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office has declined to prosecute Kidd for his conduct, and “the scale tips in favor of disclosure” in weighing the alleged victim’s right to privacy against the “constitutionally-embedded presumption of openness in judicial proceedings,” Edmead said.
This presumption guards against the potential for “injustice, incompetence, perjury and fraud,” she added.
Since the use of “fictitious names … run[s] afoul of the public’s common law right of access to judicial proceedings,” a plaintiff wishing to remain anonymous must show that a “substantial” privacy interest exists, Edmead wrote.
When considering requests to remain anonymous, a court should be guided by whether a party simply wants to “avoid the annoyance and criticism that may attend any litigation or to preserve privacy in a matter of a sensitive and highly personal nature” and if identification would result in “physical or mental harm” to the party or others, the judge wrote. James v. Jacobson, 6 F3d 233 (4th Cir. 1993).
“Embarrassment is plainly insufficient” to justify a request to withhold a litigant’s identity, the court held.
“Instead, anonymity should be limited to ‘compelling situations’ involving ‘highly sensitive matters’ including ‘social stigmatization'” or where a “‘real danger of physical harm'” exists, the judge observed.
While the judge said she was “loath to weigh degrees of violation” and did not intend to make light of the allegations, the case law and legislative history of §50-b militated against keeping the plaintiff anonymous.
She ordered the alleged victim to amend her complaint, replacing “Jane Doe” with her real name, and scheduled a preliminary conference for April 8, 2008.
Russell S. Adler, of the Fort Lauderdale, Fla., firm Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, who represented the plaintiff, did not return calls for comment.
Paul R. Grand and Jerrold L. Steigman, of Morvillo, Abramowitz, Grand, Iason, Anello & Bohrer, serve as counsel for Kidd.
“The court’s decision is further indication that Jason Kidd did not do anything wrong,” Grand said in a statement.
Yeah, don’t even get me started on the Duke case. That case was so botched. It is sad that people’s lives are ruined by FALSE accusations. If they are guilty, throw away the key.
On the Dateline Predator show: This from the Esquire article (which I strongly recommend reading, if you haven’t Lastbat) the Murphy detective alleges that Chris Hansen or someone from Dateline called and demanded that the search warrent be issued. Chris also denied that any of the crew was on the personal property of Conrad (such would have been illegal), but they later recanted when Esquire was able to describe what “Frag” one of the crewmen looked like standing beside Conradt’s door! Dateline also told the law officials they had seen a Sunday paper disappear from the front steps (which then prompted them to call in SWAT for tactical entry). Hansen would also deny this and say they did no survelience for the policy. Everything about this whole incident stinks of ratings chasing at the cost of human life. Sad….
What is all the hullabaloo about – this guy is no loss to society. If he wasn’t guilty, he certainly wouldn’t have committed suicide. He saved the courts some money – now his sister is going to waste the money again!
This man never would have killed himself if he wasn’t guilty. Therefore I think we should all be thankful to NBC for saving tax dollars on trials and possible prison time.
Don’t get me wrong, as I hate NBC as they are owned by GE, who promulgates Global Warming lies to market their products.
As much as I hate the liberal media, unfortunately this lawsuit has no constitutional grounds, and therefore must not continue.
I don’t hear anybody screaming about Al Sharpton interjecting himself into investigations to get publicity. I don’t hear anybody screaming about an attorney holding a press conference to announce a suit. But when the tables are turned someone in a position of influence gets snared, they whine like little kids. The door swings both ways. Sandra hit it right on the nose……….the guy took the cowardly way out because HE GOT CAUGHT.
This guy was an attorney, an officer of the court, and should be held to a higher standard by virtue of the oath he took. No laws were broken. While NBC might have been over-zealous, they went after the “big fish” to show nobody, regardless of position, is beyond the law.
He had his due process violated and NBC contributed to his suicide. Even criminals have rights under the constitution (as much as it pains me to say this).
What a bunch of crap! NBC didn’t pull the trigger on this guy did they? I am not a fan of NBC but this is a frivolous law suit. The kind of law suit that is hurting our society and justice system. People don’t want to be responsible for their own actions in today’s world.
Eli, have you actually read any of the information on this case? They did nothing to break the law? Maybe you should do a nice google search on this. There is a great article by Esquire on this that changed my mind after reading it. NBC forced the hand of the law enforcement by interjecting themselves into a CRIMINAL investigation. They caused the law officers to make a rash decision to send in SWAT after this guy (after they had stalked him outside his house for hours on end) and it contributed to his suicide. If he was actually a pedophile, I would say there is really no loss here; however, NBC must know it is not above the law in these matters. They are a TV station, not judge, jury, and executioner.
Dustin,
I agree with your statements. Note that the issue here is not the man’s guilt. That’s not what the lawsuit is about. Rather, the issue is simply this: Did NBC’s actions contribute in any way to the man’s death? I think the evidence shows a high degree of likelihood that the answer to that question is yes.
And I propose that there is an even bigger issue here. And I note it’s my turn to say many will disagree with me, but I’ll take a chance here: Lust is a strong emotion. It has caused men to fall throughout recorded history (remember Samson and Delilah). It bothers me that NBC and police are enticing men to go even farther down the lust road by agreeing to meet. My point is that it’s not too late to back up and get counseling when the lust is still just an “urge”. It’s when it becomes acted upon or attempted to be acted upon when it becomes a crime. And, there are other innocent victims too. When NBC broadcasts a man’s name on TV, the network is also humiliating the man’s family…his wife…his children. And they completely innocent victims. Just my thoughts…
Thanks, Bob. I agree that the show goes down a slippery entrapment slope. The Murphy DA also dimsissed all charges against those netted in the whole sting operation when the man was killed due to errors. That is one thing I don’t like about the show, is that most of the time the people aren’t even prosecuted because of some error or entrapment.
It’s called crossing the line of responsible journalism. They saw the potential in this particular arrest and their shark frenzy took over. Now if no one minds that we kill all suspected pedophiles, that’s one thing. If everyone is presumed innocent until a judge or jury finds them guilty, that would be another thing. Showing your arrest on national television might bring out some emotional responses in all of us whatever the charge. Too bad they didn’t get his suicide on tape.
remember, this is the same network that rigged a GM pickup truck to catch fire and explode because they wanted to report on allegations of GM trucks being fire prone…they rigged it so they could report the ‘news’.
Sound familiar???
The ‘catch a predator’ theme is sickening, while they may do some good with some of these, I do often wonder if some may be lured improperly, and in doing so ruin their lives.
I don’t know, there is no room for a pedophile, but we don’t know of the guilt angle. Suicide does not indicated guilt; many innocents over the years have committed suicide to avoid the further embarrassement, or even financial burdens, to their families.
This sounds like another case of NBC trying to ‘make news’ rather than report it. As someone else has pointed out, their parent company is positioning itself to make billions by buying in and perpetuating the global warming story (and making news by doing it).
No winners here; the victims (if he was guilty) are still victiims…
the family has lost a loved one…
in perpetuating their self induced ‘sting’, NBC is doing a fair job of educating would be pedophiles to watch out for their tactics, which may make it harder for law enforcement to do the same thing. I’m all for getting the creeps off the streets, but we shouldn’t interfere with law enforcement, and that’s what it sounds like here.
I agree with Sandra. Any person who shows up to a house where he thinks he might have sexual relations with a teenager, needs to be exposed!! Did you see the episode where the man shows up with his little son & Dateline caught him! What was he thinking!
Dustin, Bob, Chad, you guys are all reasonable and it’s good to see.
Suicide does not mean guilty. He could have suicided for shame of being accused. He could have suicided to prevent his family from the horror of a trial. He could have suicided to prevent going to jail, if even a holding cell. He could have suicided due to latent depression that seeing SWAT enter his house drove him to the breaking point. There are an almost infinite number of reason why he suicided and we won’t know the true one because the only one who does know is dead.
NBC trespassed, inserted themselves into a criminal operation, exerted undue pressure on law enforcement (and shame on them for giving in) and deserves to defend their actions in this suit. Since he’s dead I don’t care if the guy was a pedophile; what I do care is that news outlets re-learn how to be responsible journalists.
Let’s just throw out the Constitution; especially the Bill of Rights.
That way when one of your neighbors calls the cops on you for something they misinterpreted, the cops can just drive up, kick in your door, haul you away, and throw you in jail with no warrant, trial, or anything.
You have no clue whether this guy was guilty or not, yet claim “this guy is no loss to society”.
Not just the same network that rigged the GMC truck to explode, they also showed aching families of murder victims of VA Tech what it looked like down the barrel of the killer’s gun. Remember when the killer sent his manifesto to NBC. They COPIED IT before they even told law enforcment about it and showed it as the evening exclusive lead to haunt the victim’s families FOREVER. I will NEVER forget you did this, NBC. I will NEVER forgive you either. Burn in h@ll.
I have seen the show and I am thankful that they do expose pedophiles. There is no constitutional right to violate children in privacy. Maybe somebody will watch the show and think twice before they show up to do something like that. What about the people that were saved because they found out there could be serious consequences to their actions like being on TV? These things are taped long before they make it to TV. If someone just showed up at the house by accident, then you have a chance to fight the charges and possibly keep it off TV. Since he killed himself, I can only assume he was guilty and felt shame for his actions.
I can absolutel concur with your wishes that all pedophiles be wiped off the planet. That is not the issue.
I’ll try one more time to repeat this: The issue in this lawsuit is no longer whether or not the man was a pedophile. The issue was and is the actions of the NBC Network. Did they, or did they not, act lawfully. Did they or did they not, contribute to the suicide of the suspect. Did they or did they not violate his civil rights. And a wise judge has indicated these questions deserve to be heard in Court.
I think the problem here is that people think by breaking the law, you automatically give up ALL your civil rights. Unfortunately, no matter how heinous the crime, that is not the case.
Let’s look at the title of this. His sister is trying to make a name for herself and get rich at the same time. I agree with the remark that this prosecutor should be held to a higher standard due to his position. He shouldn’t even have been on the internet communicating sexually to minors. Anyway, in my opinion the most this suit should be for is $1M. Yes that’s a slap on the wrist for NBC, but it would show other journalist that hey, step back and think before going after ratings. Then the next time something like this happens, maybe a $100M suit would be in order. What’s going to happen to the show COPS? Are those people guilty? What about their character harmed? Maybe NBC went too far, but there are other reality shows as I stated, like COPS. And some final thoughts for you all…Where’s the line on journalism? The evening news could get some lawsuits too. They show people that are being hauled off to jail. What about Brittney Spears? Has anyone proven beyond a reasonable doubt that she is a drug addict? Okay, she’s famous and the media has a right to show her. Doesn’t this prosecutor fall into the same catagory? Guilty or not. He did something that was illegal in his State and that is to talk to minors on the internet sexually. He broke the law for his State, period. Unless of course NBC mistated that on their show, they did say just talking or emailing is illegal in Texas. Maybe he should have used his legal degree to get the law changed before doing what he did. So if COPS can stay on the air, then DATELINE maybe only guilty of entrapment. I don’t think $100M though, unless his sister is going to give all that money to Rape victims or child protective services. By the way, does anyone know if they ended up finding child porn on his computer?
This type of attack journalism is why I stopped watching 60 Minutes and all of those types of shows 20 years ago. Watching the so called reporters slant the stories to be the most vicious attacks based on what developed the highest ratings, regardless of facts, turned me off on them. Reporters feel that their profession is somehow above the law. There are good ones and bad ones in every profession, but these certainly sound like bad ones. Always remember, innocent until proven guilty in this country. Send all the child molesters to prison so the prisoners can administer their brand of justice on them, but give them the rights we are all entitled to as citizens.
With all due respect Baxter, your premise is flawed. For starters, you declared the lawyer guilty in your email. Our constitution guarantees that everyone has the right to be deemed innocent until proven guilty. Your flaw in comparing these Dateline episodes to COPS is also flawed, because they are entirely different things: Dateline is baiting real or potential pedophiles while COPS is catching real crooks in action. There is a huge difference there. Comparing this situation to that of Britney Spears is also flawed. As you aluded, Britney is a celebrity and the public scrutiny goes with the turf. BUT…even that scrutiny did not involve a network putting pressure on a police agency to engage in a dramatic, public arrest. Think about it, Amigo.
to answer the door and talk to the cops.
No one held a gun against his head to make him hold a gun against his head and the pull the trigger. Camara crew and SWAT team in his yard? Deal with it.
High time somebody stood up for our daughters. Too bad it takes a television crew to investigate the type of crime that scars women for life.
I may be wrong, but I think the civilians/perps shown on COPS sign waivers to be shown on TV. Otherwise, their faces are blurred out. Of course, only the people signing waivers make it past the editors. You will notice many of the background people blurred out.
The difference between the show “Cops” and this show is that on “Cops”, if the individual is innocent their face is blurred out so they are not identifiable. If the individual is guilty, their face is broadcast for all to see. Any other individuals standing around or providing witness must sign an authorization form or their faces are blurred out as well.
Ambush tactics hardly ever end well for the media. Sally Jessie Raphael caused a
man to murder another due to his embarassment of having a gay man declare
his attraction for him on television. How many times has the mouth from the south,
Nancy Grace been in trouble over this sort of thing?
In today’s society, being accused of child molestation brands you for life–
guilty or not. And if you are cleared
later, how much time and effort is given
by the media covering the innocent verdict? Suicide may have been seen as his
only way to save himself of being publicly
ruined. We may never know the truth now.
Do you see any purpose to the media exposing sexual predators to the public? Does the program serve any type of educational purpose in that leaving a child unprotected on the internet can result in danger? Would you like to know that your doctor or minister is trying to pick up 14-year olds in a chat room? Even if that person was not convicted of any crime, would you like to at least see what happened and how that person could still be a danger to others? Do you have a right to privacy, when you get off the internet, get into a car, choose to go into public, and act on a fantasy?
Hey Dustin, i’m not trying to argue with you…but in this case…what’s the difference between asking a pedophile to meet up at a house where police are waiting and a safety check where everyone has to be checked for drinking and driving? the police don’t need a warrant to give you a breathalizer and just cause you are driving does not mean you are drinking so why does a person have to stop?
in this case….no one made them go to the house. as far as i’m concerned….if they willfully walk into the house…there shouldn’t have to be a warrant. they made the committment online to show up and willingly did so.
i don’t see how this is an infringement on anyone’s rights.
Maybe one day we can “sense” that someone is going to commit a crime and then just execute them before they go through with the crime. Yea, that’ll work.
Or we can find the “Crime Gene” and just prevent criminals from being born. That’s even better!
Wait! Lets ban physical contact, kissing, and sex. We’ll fertilize eggs invitro. That will stop STDs while we cull the criminal genes!
Oh, and no more cussing. We’ll have microphones everywhere, and if you swear, you’ll get a ticket.
A great exhibition of the “justice” that was supposed to be available for us all. A “self-styled court of judgement” effectively allowed to operate as much outside the law and as an outright lynching of this man. And without so much as an equal opportunity for protection and a fair, impartialed rendering of the law.
A drummed up case of the law in the hands of irresponsible dramaticists that, if allowed to go unpunished, places the USA in position of a full step lower than the minimum our constitution rightfully provides and guarantees. That would be shameful. Throw the book at these self-righteous thugs.
I think it comes down to entrapment. In these dateline cases (and this is from an ex-producer of the show who was let go for having issues with the entrapment) most times the decoy suggests the meeting, not the pedophile. I think that is the main difference between this and a checkpoint. The cops didn’t suggest you drive down I-95 after 5 beers so they could pull you over. I do have issue with the perps just talking to these kids that way, so don’t get me wrong.
In this case, if Conradt had gone to the house, they would not have needed a warrant. The issue is, for whatever reason he stopped communication with the decoy and would not committ to a meeting. Dateline then found out he was a lawyer and started to salivate at the idea of busting him on tv. They rushed a warrent on some iffy evidence (try googling Conradt’s supposed Myspace page that was starting to be deleted after the phone coversations according to NBC, when in fact the site hadn’t been touched in months) and went about the arrest the wrong, and in my opinion unconstitutional way, and he killed himself. I am not defending his crime, but I am saying NBC acted recklessly and contributed to his suicide. They also interjected themselves into a criminal investigation in order to get that ratings footage of a lawyer being caught.
on the door, and I blow my brains out, its their fault? Check these statistics
from RAINN regarding our children, daughters, wives and sisters:
Every two minutes, somewhere in America, someone is sexually assaulted.
One in six American women are victims of sexual assault, and one in 33 men.
In 2005-2006, there were an average annual 232,010 victims of rape, attempted rape or sexual assault.
About 44% of rape victims are under age 18, and 80% are under age 30.
Since 1993, rape/sexual assault has fallen by over 60%.
And we consider ourselves civilized? Where are the real men?
NBC crossed the line and screwed up what could have been a legit investigation. Due to their overstepping of boundaries the DA was forced to drop charges against EVERYONE arrested in this sting. So now people who were truly guilty got to walk. Congrats. A+ journalism.
I know it is difficult to look at this from a distance when something so emotional as pedophlia is involved, but no one here is arguing that pedophila is ok, that the people who perpetrate it should not be punished. The issue is the recklessness of NBC and those law officials. I think we are detracting from the real argument here by bringing up those statistics.
I agree with what you are saying that this guy never went to the house they came to him….i guess i wan generalizing about the people who do go to the house….and with that in mind, in response to your first paragraph…maybe the decoy made the suggestion, but no one made these guys go to the house…no one made them buy the wine coolers and show up with their pants around their ankles. They chose to do that. much like i choose not to drink and drive but still have to go through a safety check.
maybe a better example would be female cops who dressed as prostitutes….i always kind of thought that was border line entrapment.
i guess ultimately…how can it be entrapment if you stop someone from breaking the law….what if the decoy was a real child and Dateline wasn’t there to stop anything from happening….because as i mentioned earlier…even if they didn’t suggest the meeting, no one MADE these guys show up to meet up with a 14 year old.
(but i do agree if all this guy was doing was talking nasty online….i don’t know why they had to break his door down.)
Nebraskan,
And exactly how would I know that?
You have my sincerest apologies. I
am sorry to have offended you with
my “mouth spouting”. I thought I was
just voicing my opinion–just as every-
one else is doing. But I guess, only
a select few are entitled to mistakes
and opinions in your view. And now
that I have been properly chastised
and corrected, I will endeavor to not
make the same mistake. But I will continue
to “spout out my mouth” as long as I
have strength in my fingers–freedom of
speech I believe it is called.
I don’t like the entrapment argument since, afterall, these guys were online talking to kids. I think the real problem with the Dateline issue is, it sensationalizes the whole affair and it normally results in no one being charged because of the entrapment. I certainly think that pedophiles should be caught and prosecuted. I don’t know about the whole female cop prostitue thing though. That is a bit iffy to me.
Is this why you always get banned at other sites, Southernbelle? Nebraskan originally kindly corrected you, and you got angry. Seems like a pattern. Shall I call David Rossimilier? :)
made the cowardly choice to take his own life instead of defending himself and clearing his FAMILY’S NAME. I know its not fashionable to think about honor, courage and respect in this day and age.
But if the honorable pedophile had sat on his couch and waited for the police to come in, he too would be in line for massive taxpayer lawsuit dollars over wrongful search and seizure. He could have explained why he was communicating with a child he didn’t coach, teach, or mentor. Adults don’t chat online with children, right? No reason to. He didn’t wait and tell his side. His act magnified the trouble he himself caused and now taxpayers have to pay to defend the actions of the police who are actually trying to protect children. As a man, I am outraged that another man, any man, would so hurt a child, or try to.
Kids need positive male role models, men who will teach boys to be men and who can teach girls how a man treats women. Kids do not need well off pedophiles who objectify other humans for their own sexual gratification.
Bob, you are correct about me insinuating he is guilty because of him sending emails back and forth to the ‘child’. However, if you read the other posts, it appears most everyone else is too. The people on COPS aren’t all criminals like you state. Most are one neighbor calling about another neighbor. You just found them guilty because someone called 911 by your comment they’re “catching real crooks”. They have the same rights as your pedophiles. You could have a point that someone was using his computer and fake name and making the email contact (isn’t it amazing how they tract it to his house?). However, then why when cops come to his door he blows his brains out? I’ve had the cops come to my door to ask if I knew who’s car was parked in front of my neighbors driveway, but I didn’t blow my brains out (I didn’t know why they were there until I answer the door and said hello). I have a feeling the judge that gave the arrest warrant looked at all the evidence closely before allowing something so national and high profile to happen. So I guess NBC held a gun to the Judges head to get the warrant so the guy could shoot himself. My guess is he was guilty because why would anyone shoot themselves for the police showing up? It wasn’t like it was being filmed live and him watching them on TV and them saying they were standing outside a pedophiles home. He had to wonder why they were there. I’d sure wonder if the cops showed up at my house as I have nothing to hide. So I take back my accusation, he wasn’t guilty, he was stupid and did us all a favor. If someone is that stupid to shoot themselves for a cop showing up at their door, car, work or whatever and they shoot themselves, they’re pretty dumb. Somebody get Jeff Foxworthy on the phone…you know you’re a redneck when…boom! Now that’s funny!
I’ve seen episodes of cops where they have female police officers hang out on streets to solicit sex…and if anyone so much as stops and says hi…they are busted for trying to hire a hooker….what’s the difference between that and this?
but i see your point…what good does it really do if all of these people are set free on a technicality.
Thank you Sandra. You know, this dude had the devil in him (whispering in his ear),
yes, go after the most vulnerable to do your sick, fiendish sex acts. Then, bite a gun if you’re caught. You’ll get out of having to face The Lord’s wrath…
ya, right. Thank you, father of lies. As for his sister, a 1 trillion dollar lawsuit
won’t change her brother’s decision making.
To my knowledge I have not been banned.
I don’t have time to visit alot of sites. And if someone using SouthernBelle has
been banned–It wasn’t this one. This is the first day that I have even responded
to any comments in almost two weeks.
And I was not angry. Not really. I just don’t watch talk shows like that and believe it or not I was thanking Nebraskan. Perhaps I chose the wording badly. I was trying to be coy.
I sincerely apologize. All the rest is just tongue in cheek attempt at wit.
The point I was making in my original post was that these types of media ambushes have bad history. GEE!
Actually, I would say now the public has to pay to defend because of the police force being incompetent and push overs to the rating mongers of Dateline. If they had done things by the book we might have all the answers. Again, the blame is not all on them as Conradt did pull the trigger. I am just saying the whole thing was botched. Also, dateline was outside the house for hours with their crew and equipment, it wasn’t like they just showed up and knocked on the door. There were calls from neighbors about “suspicious” people lurking in the neighborhood. He also shot himself when swat AND the film crew came into his house.
You should google your userid. I found some interesting stuff about someone who gets banned all the time and stuff. Also check out http://www.insurancecoverageblog.com to see someone using that alias. Have a good one.
The entrapment comes when the officer is the one to offer. If I walk up to a woman (who happens to be a cop) and say “Hey, you wanna **** for $100?” then they can bust me for soliciting; but if she says it it’s entrapment. Same thing here.
The difference between COPS and this is the way people are portrayed. COPS has been very careful to note that people are innocent until proven guilty, while “To Catch a Predator”, by its very title, portrays people as guilty unless proven innocent. I have seen a few shows and they build these guys up as guilty during the show. COPS also rarely releases names and blurs faces frequently in an effort to preserve identity and dignity. They hand out waivers like candy during shoots; you don’t sign, you’re blurred out. COPS is not about “catching” anyone, it’s about following police officers around on their normal day. Many COPS episodes have little or no actual “catching”, it’s a lot of dispute settling and “why did he run” and things of that nature – rather boring considering what Hollywood portrays a normal cop day to be.
Confusing the issue at stake in this suit with the issue of pedophilia does not help settle it. We don’t know if the guy was a pedophile. We do know that his name will now be forever tarnished (and still would have been had he been proven innocent) and that NBC may well have materially contributed to his death. NBC needs to stand up and defend their actions in court.
Thanks, I guess I will be changing. It
irks me a little. I have been called
SouthernBelle since college. It’s the
dialect and accent of my speech that got
me the nickname.
And again I do apologize. I guess I just
am not good at this. Bye Now!
We will find out if indeed the police and Dateline did anything wrong. It truly remains to be seen. The damage caused by men (mostly) who insist on having sex with children is measurable, widespread and far-reaching. The out-of-wedlock birth rates in our country now approach 40%. There is some reason women are not marrying the fathers of children at a rate unprecedented in our country. I believe that part of the problem is that we are not teaching our daughters the correct sequence of events with regard to sex, procreation, education, the workplace, and marriage. And I think many things contribute to the problem, including how easily accessible our kids are to complete strangers. We are out of tilt, and half our population thinks we solve these types of problems by throwing money at them. The absence of fathers in the lives of children leave the kids vulnerable to those who would exploit them. I’d like the lawyer to come to my house and try to gain access to my daughter. He would learn the value of a positive role model in the life of MY daughter. I think its time to call out these losers who value orgasm over whats best for the community.
So we have a suicidal, “potential” child molester, in a position of authority; making a decision not to defend themselves of the charges; and then commits the selfish act of taking their own life and leaving loved ones deal with the situation on their own. Then the family wants some money for their anguish.
I would be angry, but angry that someone I trusted so much is showing up at teens home’s, whether he was out for sex, or not. I would wonder that if I had kids whether they would have been safe left in his care when he babysat. I don’t blame the family for wanting money, as they have been through much. I blame the juries that rob Peter to pay Paul.
I started reading thru the many e-mails on this subject, but grew tired, so decided to add my own. — Since when does a television station decided when and how a law enforcement agency should act. If any entity is liable for the man’s suicide 9except himself), it would be the Law enforcement agency and the judge who issued the warrant. They are the “experts” on the law. —- On an another note, remember the axion: “They do not hang men because they stole horses, they hang them, so other men won’t steal horses”. NBC has “to catch a predator”, so other men won’t think of hooking up with a underage girl. – one other note, did they show what e-mails were passed between the suicider and the decoy? If he did send lewd comments, then he was guilty of a crime. & finally, if he was an agent of the Court, I would suspect that he had enough muscle to wipe the stain of any DATELINE story on him, and possibly expose DATELINE for their “dirty tactics”
If you have seen the show, it is online chat logs, not email that is collected as evidence. There are chat rooms that are frequented by pedophiles. Perverted Justice monitors the chat rooms, and poses as underage children. Someone contacted NBC, possibly Perverted Justice, and stated that there are adults propositioning children with sex in these chat rooms and nothing is being done about it. Many local enforcement outfits are not technologically savvy, and the FBI doesn’t usually get involved unless the crime crosses state lines. I guess someone wondered whether there was a story in whether these perverts would follow through with their chat and actually show up at the house to meet the child. Dateline thought it would be interesting to interview these people and ask them “what was going through your mind before you came here?”
Law enforcement was not originally involved, as it was originally an attempt to figure out why an adult would just show up at a teen’s home with condoms or alcohol that they had just met in a chat room. There was a lot of public outrage after the initial episodes that the people were just allowed to leave after being confronted, and law enforcement asked to be part of the process. The people that are convicted are usually charged with soliciting to have sex with a minor, not actual sex contact.
I also believe that the person involved with this case was never convicted of anything because he killed himself before any trial. I don’t believe the court was going to try him after his death. He could have fought the charges, but I guess he didn’t choose to.
You know, just because of this guys status, a lawsuit is being entertained. What about all of those other sick sobs that prey on our children through the internet – maybe they should all sue too for defamation of character etc. That guy’s guilt or shame from being CAUGHT was what prompted his suicide. Those pedophiles on that show deserve each and everything that comes to them.
I watched the special. I’m convinced by the evidence that was presented that the man was probably guilty. I think that he saw the case was indefensible, and took the only easy way out. Of course, he may not have been guilty and just thought that whether or not the case was proved, the accusation and publicity would be enough to wreck his life, we’ll never know. What I do see now, is the usual wrongful death ******** I see every time we work a fatality. Folks we’re all going to die. I hate to remind you, but it’s on our planners, albeit with a “tentative” date. For whatever reason, the man decided to pick his own date and circumstances, and no, NBC, The Police Dept, Dr Ruth, no one but he himself pulled the trigger.
Was he a pedophile ? I don’t know, but he is square with the house now, whether he was guilty and avoiding punishment, or innocent and unwilling to trust himself to the system he was a part of, he is dead, and whatever he did or didn’t do is between him and his God, and giving someone a lot of money is not going to change anything.
There are a bunch of men out there who are not true Pedaphiles but have been tittilatd by the junk on the Internet. They then get caught up in the Crack Cocaine of the Internet — child sex porn. These folks indulge in secret, without ever coming in contact with reality other than the exploitive viewing of abuse. They can’t stop the addiction and they are freaking out because there is no where to turn. When they come to the attention of the media or cops they commit suicide. The suicide rate among such arrests is the highest of any known group.
OK, to start, I am a father with several daughters. The language he used alone is enough to get him arrested for indecency with a child. The suggestions and descriptions of the acts he wanted to commit AFTER her knew the “girl” was “14” is also a charge of intent of criminal sexual assault of a child in Texas. That he was a lawyer shows he knew that what he was doing was a punishable crime but he continued despite this knowledge. That NBC acted irresponsibly in the pursuit of sensationalism is the basis of the suit. I agree with all these points. And if found guilty, I believe NBC should be held accountable for the wrongs they commited. I DO NOT however, believe that NBC should be held responsible for the choice Conradt made in taking his own life. His reason and justification died with him. That is the choice HE made. Now, along comes his sister and wants 100 million because her brother killed himself? What justifies this? Because NBC has the money? She, in my opinion at this point based on what I have heard, is just as guilty as NBC of wanting to cash in on her brother’s infamy and crimes. There was irrefutable evidence of his commiting as least two punishable crimes of sexual indecency with what he thought was a child. Entrapment? Did she ask him to talk dirty or if he wanted sex? Not in the transcripts I have read. I feel responsibility here lies with the police for allowing themselves to be prodded to act unprofessionally, and with the judge for allowing himself to be coerced into issueing a warrant for the arrest. They are, however, only human regardless of their position and money and fame is a compelling incentive. I am not exonerating anyone or excusing anyone’s actions. My greivance is with the sister. She doesn’t deserve to profit from her brother’s death and I feel her asking for so much is her going for the brass ring and hoping to get a sympathetic jury to assure her comfortable future.
COMMON SENSE. WHAT HAPPENED TO IT? SUE A TV SHOW FOR MAKING A DIFFERENCE IN THE FIGHT AGAINST PEDAPHILES, WHATS HAPPENING TO THIS COUNTRY? IM A MOM OF 4 AND I THINK JUSTICE FREVAILED IN THIS CASE. ONE LESS PEDAPHILE TO ATTACK OUR KIDS, THATS A GOOD THING. NBC DID NOTHING WRONG THE WEIRDO DID. THEN HE SHOT HIMSELF- TO BAD HE DIDNT TAKE HIS SISTER WITH HIM.
No one commented on your post Gil, but I think that its right on. We as a society have sex turned on its ear. Single moms are seen as heroic for having a baby without a dad, but a kid needs the impact of both parents to become a fully formed adult. Men who weren’t given any form of sexual education now look at kiddie porn and then some want to take it a step further. And the sex ed of “everything is ok and you can’t make judgements about another persons sexual beliefs and feelings doesn’t count”. Don’t tell me its not true because 3 of my kids have gone through sex ed and have had this drilled into their heads-and what they have learned-that there is no right or wrong if 2 people consent isn’t what I learned in public schools in the 70’s-that sex is a responsibility not a freedom and that there are consequences for having sex when you shouldn’t-just like we learned about responsibility in driveers ed and about drinking and smokin in health aren’t applied today.
As a result, we are growing several generations of adults who have some really screwed up ideas about sex-and we’ll see this more and more until we go back to bassics and teach our kids correctly.
I expect to get bashed for some of what I’m going to type.
I do have to stand up for the men – according to the Administration for Children and Families women are equal opportunity abusers. 40% of all abusers are mothers (http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm05/figure3_5.htm). Granted this covers all maltreatment, but we need to stop focusing on men and focus on what truly matters – education and protection of our children. As I recall the past few high-profile cases of teachers having sex with students have been female teachers preying on male students.
We need to make it undesireable to have children out of wedlock. We need to stop supporting people who make bad decisions. We need to stop allowing predators back on the street. What two consenting adults do behind closed doors is their business; but once you bring a child into it it’s the community’s business.
While we’re at it we need to make the laws regarding the age of consent realistic. I heard a story within the last year of two boys (18 or 19) who went to prison and are now registered sex offenders because they received oral sex from girls within a couple years of their age. The one I remember best was an 18-year old boy and 17-year old girl, because it was so asinine. Granted, it’s illegal, but we need to make the laws more realistic.
I believe that was in Georgia that you are talking about. It was a black male, and apparently the state changed the statuary law to remove charges if the 2 were within 2 years of each other, or something to that effect. The real trouble came when they refused to reduce his sentence, since the violation occurred before the law changed. It was a pretty messed up situation, in my opinion.
wedlock…
such as gay lesbian couples having or adopting children?
such as women abandoned or murdered when the bio. fathers they learn of their pregancies?
How about professional women who do not want a husband but want a child…
Homosexuals should be allowed to marry – thus they could have children inside of wedlock. Easy one that.
Roe v Wade gives women the right to opt out of parenthood, we need to give men the right to opt out of parenthood. If he doesn’t want children and makes that known, he shouldn’t be on the hook when his genes get hijacked.
As for professional women – a single parent is a single parent. Children are, generally speaking, more well rounded when raised by mother and father.
I’m not saying people can’t have children out of wedlock, we just need to make it undesireable. For instance, how many women would have children by men who don’t want children if the man didn’t have to pay child support? I don’t know the answer to that, but a good guess is fewer. Now for those that scream “Child support is necessary!” I say it should be paid only if he wanted the child. This means women will have to be as careful about choosing their men as men are about choosing their women. They’ll have to talk. They’ll have to take precautions.
I don’t know yet what I believe should happen in cases of divorce, except that joint-custody should be standard with no alimony and no child support in those cases. Because if the man has the child half the time, and the woman has the child half the time, why should anyone pay support?
It’s all about making people resonsible for their decisions.
I like where you’re going, lastbat… but good luck getting there.
Unfortunately, for ages and ages a huge number of people have failed to make good choices when it comes to sexual partners. Beyond that, they don’t make good choices when it comes to protection either.
You would think having a child as a teen or without financial means is already an extremely undesireable situation. But apparently it’s still not undesireable enough to keep people from producing kids.
Other than eliminating child support (that so many single/divorced parents don’t receive anyway) what else do you think would be effective against the problem?
We can’t exactly go in people’s homes and say “don’t sleep with that person because you’re not married and you might accidentally get knocked up”. I’m sure you’re not proposing that as a solution… but just sayin… what more can be done?
On the extremes (which some days I support) there are several ideas.
Put contraceptives in municipal water supplies. This has the downside of not being chemically feasible as there are too many potential reactions. It would also be bypassed by the rich who could afford their own water source.
License parenting. We force people to ask the government for permission to marry, why not to have kids? The upside is you can fine people and put them in jail for breaking the law. The downside is it’s more government intervention in my life and I’m trying to minimize that intervention.
Government raised children. Have whatever kids you want, but you won’t be raising them. They will go to a government facility and you will probably never see them again. Up side is you don’t have to worry about single parents anymore. The down side is the same as above – plus a million other things.
Ultimately we need to exert societal pressure. Men should stop dating single mothers and women should stop dating single fathers. These people (in most cases) have already shown they make poor judgement calls.
I do support sterilization efforts. We as a society need to support sterilization. This could mean somebody setting up a foundation to provide free tubal ligation and vasectomies to people, or it could mean local governments providing sterilization at clinics.
Mandate DNA testing for every live birth. I heard a statistic from Marc Rudov (I haven’t verified it yet) that more than 20% of all births to wedded couples are not the husband’s child. He should know that and not be on the hook for any support legally. If he wants to support the child, fine, but he shouldn’t be required to.
The problem with making single-parenthood undesireable is that it affects the children. They are caught in the mess their parents created. American society must have an honest and open discussion about this and realize that to reverse our current trend we need to push for true equality among the sexes (which we don’t have in the least) and that reversing this trend will mean taking away benefits that currently help some children, but by doing so will discourage others from putting children in their place.
I agree we have taken a detour, but I do take issue with you calling the sister a money grubbing @#$@@!. She may be for all I know, but then again she might not. I do agree the amount of money is pretty ridiculous, but I am more concerned with what she does if she wins. You also have to think about why she is suing and whom she is suing. If NBC is to take notice and get hit where it hurts, the amount of money should be quite a bit (since they are a large company and a few million is chump change to them). The end result, from what I have read, is to keep Dateline from sticking their noses into police investigations and get back to journalism, not sentastionalism that can endanger lives. I don’t condone what Conradt did, but I also don’t condone the actions of Dateline and Chris Hansen. Unfortunately, in this day the only way to stop a big company from doing things like this is to hit them where it hurts: the wallet and in the media. I think this lawsuit does both, and until we see what she does with the money (if she wins that is) we can’t truly know her means. It is pretty easy to demonize her (even easier to demonize him!) but it is much harder to put yourself in her shoes and see things from her perspective. Hopefully she will put the money towards rehabilitation of child sex offenders, or fund rehabilitation for the children since they are harmed so much by this. I only hope in the process she doesn’t keep the money and I wish some lawyer didn’t have to get rich.
Conversations do that sometimes. It’s just the way discussions go.
Personally, I would get very bored with life if I were only allowed to discuss one topic at a time with people. Who wants to live in a box like that?
If I’ve violated some sort of “off topic” rule here, I’m sorry. I guess I’m not one of those people who has a problem with talking about a variety of subjects at one time. My bad.
KLS, there are no rules about these posts except the common rules of decent behaviour as far as I know. No need to apologise to me I was attempting to inject a bit of levity into the thread and making a “sideways” comment about the turns it has taken.
Dustin, I live near Terrell and know the family. I know her and I know her motivations, they are the same now they have been all her life. MONEY. I know that of which I speak. I will reinerate, I don’t see where sueing NBC will teach the police and the jude any lesson about keeping the law under THEIR control instead of allowing money and other influences to coerce them into violating a person’s rights or due process of the law.
I would tend to agree with you, but I read a very good article on this whole debacle in Esquire a few months ago. The issue here is that NBC clearly interjected into the police aspect of things and really caused the inexperienced police men that were on the case and helping out to push forward. From what I understand when they found out he was a lawyer they were like, “I don’t care what happens, we have to get this guy on camera.” When he stopped talking to the decoy and refused to setup a meeting (the whole premise to the show is the perp comes to the decoy house for a meeting), CBS went out to him with a rushed warrent instead of letting the law work it out. While I certainly have no sympathy for a pedophile as I feel they deserve none, this was a unique case. I would say that NBC acted wrecklessly to obtain a story for ratings, and this resulted in a man’s death. He did not commit suicide until they got to the house. While his guilt played a part, I would say that NBC’s wrecklessness was the proximate cause of his suicide. I am sure I will be blasted as having sympathy for a pedophile, but I don’t. I do however feel that CBS crossed a line.
Isn’t it funny that the show that catches Internet predators by pretending to be teenage girls at home alone is called “Dateline”?
Dustin, I read similar articles and drew much the same conclusions. Normally you don’t have a full SWAT team go in after somebody who is not considered to be armed and dangerous. Normally you would send out a couple officers and do it as quietly as possible.
I’m going to get blasted for the rest of this. I wish to preface that I believe killing is too good for sexual predators of any age or gender, but killing is the best I think we can do (even though we don’t).
He was a SUSPECTED pedophile. I have a big problem with releasing the names of suspects in sexual crimes while hiding the alleged victim. There are too many cases, high profile cases (remember Duke University anyone?), of false accusation of sex crimes. Even if proven guilty the accused’s life is forever damaged and it is extremely rare for the accuser to be tried – even though false accusation is a felony. The suspects and the victims should be out of the spotlight unless and until proven guilty. If the suspect is proven guilty, paste their face across the nation and then kill them. If the suspect is proven innocent, hide them forever and paste the name of the accuser across the nation, then lock them up.
I have no sympathy for those that prey on others, but I do have sympathy for those whose lives are ruined needlessly. I’m surprised there haven’t been more suicides due to the “To Catch a Predator” series. I think the only reason we haven’t seen them before is because they normally only air the ones that show up to the house and it’s hard to blow your brains out when you have four cops sitting on you. I’m not a fan of lawsuits, but I hope they win this one because we need to change how we do business.
I normally don’t cross-post articles, but after my last posting I found this:
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1204212428181&pos=ataglance
Accuser in Jason Kidd Sexual Battery Case Loses Her Bid for Anonymity
Noeleen G. Walder
New York Law Journal
February 29, 2008
Printer-friendly Email this Article Reprints & Permissions
An aspiring model’s request to keep her identity under wraps in a sexual battery suit she filed against basketball star Jason Kidd has been denied by a Manhattan judge.
The woman’s desire to avoid “embarrassment” is a “plainly insufficient” ground for invoking New York Civil Rights Law 50-b, which protects the privacy of alleged sexual offense victims, New York State Supreme Court Justice Carol Edmead held in Jane Doe v. Jason Kidd, 116541-07.
Using fictitious names “runs afoul” of the public’s right of access to judicial proceedings, and anonymity should be restricted to situations where a plaintiff faces a “risk of retaliatory physical or mental harm,” the judge said.
She noted that Kidd was not charged with a crime, and that the woman’s representatives have themselves sensationalized her case by speaking to the press and “openly” disparaging Kidd.
“[P]laintiff’s voluntary identification of a … famous basketball player, in her pleadings, and to the press, undermines” her purported need for anonymity, the court ruled.
Kidd allegedly encountered the 23-year-old woman on Oct. 10, 2007, at Tenjune, a nightclub on Little W. 12th Street in the Meatpacking District of Manhattan.
According to the decision, the woman accused Kidd of grabbing her buttocks and “crotch.”
The October incident came just three months before Kidd’s rocky personal life attracted widespread media attention when he filed a restraining order against his estranged wife.
His career also has been in flux. Less than two weeks ago, he was traded from the New Jersey Nets to his original draft team, the Dallas Mavericks.
Following the nightclub encounter, the alleged victim filed suit, claiming Kidd acted “reckless[ly]” and caused her to reasonably fear that she would suffer “immediately harmful or offensive contact.” The woman also maintained that the alleged battery caused her ongoing physical and mental damage, which has interfered with her employment and other activities.
The plaintiff argued that she should be permitted to bring the suit anonymously under New York Civil Rights Law §50-b, which prevents the “public inspection” of court files, photographs and other documents “that name a victim of a sexual offense.”
Edmead disagreed. While legislative history generally only is used to resolve “ambiguous” statutory language, “in this case, the intent of the framers … is critical as to the intended covered individuals,” the judge noted.
Section 50-b “serves two important purposes,” the judge wrote: to shield victims from the embarrassment of media coverage and to “encourage victims to cooperate in the criminal prosecution of sexual offenses.”
PRESUMPTION OF OPENNESS
Here, however, the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office has declined to prosecute Kidd for his conduct, and “the scale tips in favor of disclosure” in weighing the alleged victim’s right to privacy against the “constitutionally-embedded presumption of openness in judicial proceedings,” Edmead said.
This presumption guards against the potential for “injustice, incompetence, perjury and fraud,” she added.
Since the use of “fictitious names … run[s] afoul of the public’s common law right of access to judicial proceedings,” a plaintiff wishing to remain anonymous must show that a “substantial” privacy interest exists, Edmead wrote.
When considering requests to remain anonymous, a court should be guided by whether a party simply wants to “avoid the annoyance and criticism that may attend any litigation or to preserve privacy in a matter of a sensitive and highly personal nature” and if identification would result in “physical or mental harm” to the party or others, the judge wrote. James v. Jacobson, 6 F3d 233 (4th Cir. 1993).
“Embarrassment is plainly insufficient” to justify a request to withhold a litigant’s identity, the court held.
“Instead, anonymity should be limited to ‘compelling situations’ involving ‘highly sensitive matters’ including ‘social stigmatization'” or where a “‘real danger of physical harm'” exists, the judge observed.
While the judge said she was “loath to weigh degrees of violation” and did not intend to make light of the allegations, the case law and legislative history of §50-b militated against keeping the plaintiff anonymous.
She ordered the alleged victim to amend her complaint, replacing “Jane Doe” with her real name, and scheduled a preliminary conference for April 8, 2008.
Russell S. Adler, of the Fort Lauderdale, Fla., firm Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, who represented the plaintiff, did not return calls for comment.
Paul R. Grand and Jerrold L. Steigman, of Morvillo, Abramowitz, Grand, Iason, Anello & Bohrer, serve as counsel for Kidd.
“The court’s decision is further indication that Jason Kidd did not do anything wrong,” Grand said in a statement.
Yeah, don’t even get me started on the Duke case. That case was so botched. It is sad that people’s lives are ruined by FALSE accusations. If they are guilty, throw away the key.
On the Dateline Predator show: This from the Esquire article (which I strongly recommend reading, if you haven’t Lastbat) the Murphy detective alleges that Chris Hansen or someone from Dateline called and demanded that the search warrent be issued. Chris also denied that any of the crew was on the personal property of Conrad (such would have been illegal), but they later recanted when Esquire was able to describe what “Frag” one of the crewmen looked like standing beside Conradt’s door! Dateline also told the law officials they had seen a Sunday paper disappear from the front steps (which then prompted them to call in SWAT for tactical entry). Hansen would also deny this and say they did no survelience for the policy. Everything about this whole incident stinks of ratings chasing at the cost of human life. Sad….
This is entertainment folks, buy our sponsors’ products!
What is all the hullabaloo about – this guy is no loss to society. If he wasn’t guilty, he certainly wouldn’t have committed suicide. He saved the courts some money – now his sister is going to waste the money again!
This man never would have killed himself if he wasn’t guilty. Therefore I think we should all be thankful to NBC for saving tax dollars on trials and possible prison time.
Don’t get me wrong, as I hate NBC as they are owned by GE, who promulgates Global Warming lies to market their products.
As much as I hate the liberal media, unfortunately this lawsuit has no constitutional grounds, and therefore must not continue.
I don’t hear anybody screaming about Al Sharpton interjecting himself into investigations to get publicity. I don’t hear anybody screaming about an attorney holding a press conference to announce a suit. But when the tables are turned someone in a position of influence gets snared, they whine like little kids. The door swings both ways. Sandra hit it right on the nose……….the guy took the cowardly way out because HE GOT CAUGHT.
This guy was an attorney, an officer of the court, and should be held to a higher standard by virtue of the oath he took. No laws were broken. While NBC might have been over-zealous, they went after the “big fish” to show nobody, regardless of position, is beyond the law.
He had his due process violated and NBC contributed to his suicide. Even criminals have rights under the constitution (as much as it pains me to say this).
What a bunch of crap! NBC didn’t pull the trigger on this guy did they? I am not a fan of NBC but this is a frivolous law suit. The kind of law suit that is hurting our society and justice system. People don’t want to be responsible for their own actions in today’s world.
Eli, have you actually read any of the information on this case? They did nothing to break the law? Maybe you should do a nice google search on this. There is a great article by Esquire on this that changed my mind after reading it. NBC forced the hand of the law enforcement by interjecting themselves into a CRIMINAL investigation. They caused the law officers to make a rash decision to send in SWAT after this guy (after they had stalked him outside his house for hours on end) and it contributed to his suicide. If he was actually a pedophile, I would say there is really no loss here; however, NBC must know it is not above the law in these matters. They are a TV station, not judge, jury, and executioner.
Dustin,
I agree with your statements. Note that the issue here is not the man’s guilt. That’s not what the lawsuit is about. Rather, the issue is simply this: Did NBC’s actions contribute in any way to the man’s death? I think the evidence shows a high degree of likelihood that the answer to that question is yes.
And I propose that there is an even bigger issue here. And I note it’s my turn to say many will disagree with me, but I’ll take a chance here: Lust is a strong emotion. It has caused men to fall throughout recorded history (remember Samson and Delilah). It bothers me that NBC and police are enticing men to go even farther down the lust road by agreeing to meet. My point is that it’s not too late to back up and get counseling when the lust is still just an “urge”. It’s when it becomes acted upon or attempted to be acted upon when it becomes a crime. And, there are other innocent victims too. When NBC broadcasts a man’s name on TV, the network is also humiliating the man’s family…his wife…his children. And they completely innocent victims. Just my thoughts…
Thanks, Bob. I agree that the show goes down a slippery entrapment slope. The Murphy DA also dimsissed all charges against those netted in the whole sting operation when the man was killed due to errors. That is one thing I don’t like about the show, is that most of the time the people aren’t even prosecuted because of some error or entrapment.
It’s called crossing the line of responsible journalism. They saw the potential in this particular arrest and their shark frenzy took over. Now if no one minds that we kill all suspected pedophiles, that’s one thing. If everyone is presumed innocent until a judge or jury finds them guilty, that would be another thing. Showing your arrest on national television might bring out some emotional responses in all of us whatever the charge. Too bad they didn’t get his suicide on tape.
remember, this is the same network that rigged a GM pickup truck to catch fire and explode because they wanted to report on allegations of GM trucks being fire prone…they rigged it so they could report the ‘news’.
Sound familiar???
The ‘catch a predator’ theme is sickening, while they may do some good with some of these, I do often wonder if some may be lured improperly, and in doing so ruin their lives.
I don’t know, there is no room for a pedophile, but we don’t know of the guilt angle. Suicide does not indicated guilt; many innocents over the years have committed suicide to avoid the further embarrassement, or even financial burdens, to their families.
This sounds like another case of NBC trying to ‘make news’ rather than report it. As someone else has pointed out, their parent company is positioning itself to make billions by buying in and perpetuating the global warming story (and making news by doing it).
No winners here; the victims (if he was guilty) are still victiims…
the family has lost a loved one…
in perpetuating their self induced ‘sting’, NBC is doing a fair job of educating would be pedophiles to watch out for their tactics, which may make it harder for law enforcement to do the same thing. I’m all for getting the creeps off the streets, but we shouldn’t interfere with law enforcement, and that’s what it sounds like here.
I agree with Sandra. Any person who shows up to a house where he thinks he might have sexual relations with a teenager, needs to be exposed!! Did you see the episode where the man shows up with his little son & Dateline caught him! What was he thinking!
Dustin, Bob, Chad, you guys are all reasonable and it’s good to see.
Suicide does not mean guilty. He could have suicided for shame of being accused. He could have suicided to prevent his family from the horror of a trial. He could have suicided to prevent going to jail, if even a holding cell. He could have suicided due to latent depression that seeing SWAT enter his house drove him to the breaking point. There are an almost infinite number of reason why he suicided and we won’t know the true one because the only one who does know is dead.
NBC trespassed, inserted themselves into a criminal operation, exerted undue pressure on law enforcement (and shame on them for giving in) and deserves to defend their actions in this suit. Since he’s dead I don’t care if the guy was a pedophile; what I do care is that news outlets re-learn how to be responsible journalists.
Carol,
Let’s just throw out the Constitution; especially the Bill of Rights.
That way when one of your neighbors calls the cops on you for something they misinterpreted, the cops can just drive up, kick in your door, haul you away, and throw you in jail with no warrant, trial, or anything.
You have no clue whether this guy was guilty or not, yet claim “this guy is no loss to society”.
Dave, don’t look outside; I think it’s NBC. They have some questions for you.
Not just the same network that rigged the GMC truck to explode, they also showed aching families of murder victims of VA Tech what it looked like down the barrel of the killer’s gun. Remember when the killer sent his manifesto to NBC. They COPIED IT before they even told law enforcment about it and showed it as the evening exclusive lead to haunt the victim’s families FOREVER. I will NEVER forget you did this, NBC. I will NEVER forgive you either. Burn in h@ll.
I have seen the show and I am thankful that they do expose pedophiles. There is no constitutional right to violate children in privacy. Maybe somebody will watch the show and think twice before they show up to do something like that. What about the people that were saved because they found out there could be serious consequences to their actions like being on TV? These things are taped long before they make it to TV. If someone just showed up at the house by accident, then you have a chance to fight the charges and possibly keep it off TV. Since he killed himself, I can only assume he was guilty and felt shame for his actions.
Your latest post was right on target.
He never showed up at the house, though.
I can absolutel concur with your wishes that all pedophiles be wiped off the planet. That is not the issue.
I’ll try one more time to repeat this: The issue in this lawsuit is no longer whether or not the man was a pedophile. The issue was and is the actions of the NBC Network. Did they, or did they not, act lawfully. Did they or did they not, contribute to the suicide of the suspect. Did they or did they not violate his civil rights. And a wise judge has indicated these questions deserve to be heard in Court.
I think the problem here is that people think by breaking the law, you automatically give up ALL your civil rights. Unfortunately, no matter how heinous the crime, that is not the case.
Let’s look at the title of this. His sister is trying to make a name for herself and get rich at the same time. I agree with the remark that this prosecutor should be held to a higher standard due to his position. He shouldn’t even have been on the internet communicating sexually to minors. Anyway, in my opinion the most this suit should be for is $1M. Yes that’s a slap on the wrist for NBC, but it would show other journalist that hey, step back and think before going after ratings. Then the next time something like this happens, maybe a $100M suit would be in order. What’s going to happen to the show COPS? Are those people guilty? What about their character harmed? Maybe NBC went too far, but there are other reality shows as I stated, like COPS. And some final thoughts for you all…Where’s the line on journalism? The evening news could get some lawsuits too. They show people that are being hauled off to jail. What about Brittney Spears? Has anyone proven beyond a reasonable doubt that she is a drug addict? Okay, she’s famous and the media has a right to show her. Doesn’t this prosecutor fall into the same catagory? Guilty or not. He did something that was illegal in his State and that is to talk to minors on the internet sexually. He broke the law for his State, period. Unless of course NBC mistated that on their show, they did say just talking or emailing is illegal in Texas. Maybe he should have used his legal degree to get the law changed before doing what he did. So if COPS can stay on the air, then DATELINE maybe only guilty of entrapment. I don’t think $100M though, unless his sister is going to give all that money to Rape victims or child protective services. By the way, does anyone know if they ended up finding child porn on his computer?
This type of attack journalism is why I stopped watching 60 Minutes and all of those types of shows 20 years ago. Watching the so called reporters slant the stories to be the most vicious attacks based on what developed the highest ratings, regardless of facts, turned me off on them. Reporters feel that their profession is somehow above the law. There are good ones and bad ones in every profession, but these certainly sound like bad ones. Always remember, innocent until proven guilty in this country. Send all the child molesters to prison so the prisoners can administer their brand of justice on them, but give them the rights we are all entitled to as citizens.
With all due respect Baxter, your premise is flawed. For starters, you declared the lawyer guilty in your email. Our constitution guarantees that everyone has the right to be deemed innocent until proven guilty. Your flaw in comparing these Dateline episodes to COPS is also flawed, because they are entirely different things: Dateline is baiting real or potential pedophiles while COPS is catching real crooks in action. There is a huge difference there. Comparing this situation to that of Britney Spears is also flawed. As you aluded, Britney is a celebrity and the public scrutiny goes with the turf. BUT…even that scrutiny did not involve a network putting pressure on a police agency to engage in a dramatic, public arrest. Think about it, Amigo.
to answer the door and talk to the cops.
No one held a gun against his head to make him hold a gun against his head and the pull the trigger. Camara crew and SWAT team in his yard? Deal with it.
High time somebody stood up for our daughters. Too bad it takes a television crew to investigate the type of crime that scars women for life.
I may be wrong, but I think the civilians/perps shown on COPS sign waivers to be shown on TV. Otherwise, their faces are blurred out. Of course, only the people signing waivers make it past the editors. You will notice many of the background people blurred out.
The difference between the show “Cops” and this show is that on “Cops”, if the individual is innocent their face is blurred out so they are not identifiable. If the individual is guilty, their face is broadcast for all to see. Any other individuals standing around or providing witness must sign an authorization form or their faces are blurred out as well.
Ambush tactics hardly ever end well for the media. Sally Jessie Raphael caused a
man to murder another due to his embarassment of having a gay man declare
his attraction for him on television. How many times has the mouth from the south,
Nancy Grace been in trouble over this sort of thing?
In today’s society, being accused of child molestation brands you for life–
guilty or not. And if you are cleared
later, how much time and effort is given
by the media covering the innocent verdict? Suicide may have been seen as his
only way to save himself of being publicly
ruined. We may never know the truth now.
Do you see any purpose to the media exposing sexual predators to the public? Does the program serve any type of educational purpose in that leaving a child unprotected on the internet can result in danger? Would you like to know that your doctor or minister is trying to pick up 14-year olds in a chat room? Even if that person was not convicted of any crime, would you like to at least see what happened and how that person could still be a danger to others? Do you have a right to privacy, when you get off the internet, get into a car, choose to go into public, and act on a fantasy?
Hey Dustin, i’m not trying to argue with you…but in this case…what’s the difference between asking a pedophile to meet up at a house where police are waiting and a safety check where everyone has to be checked for drinking and driving? the police don’t need a warrant to give you a breathalizer and just cause you are driving does not mean you are drinking so why does a person have to stop?
in this case….no one made them go to the house. as far as i’m concerned….if they willfully walk into the house…there shouldn’t have to be a warrant. they made the committment online to show up and willingly did so.
i don’t see how this is an infringement on anyone’s rights.
Maybe one day we can “sense” that someone is going to commit a crime and then just execute them before they go through with the crime. Yea, that’ll work.
Or we can find the “Crime Gene” and just prevent criminals from being born. That’s even better!
Wait! Lets ban physical contact, kissing, and sex. We’ll fertilize eggs invitro. That will stop STDs while we cull the criminal genes!
Oh, and no more cussing. We’ll have microphones everywhere, and if you swear, you’ll get a ticket.
Hey, what are those three seashells for?
Happy happy, joy joy!
A great exhibition of the “justice” that was supposed to be available for us all. A “self-styled court of judgement” effectively allowed to operate as much outside the law and as an outright lynching of this man. And without so much as an equal opportunity for protection and a fair, impartialed rendering of the law.
A drummed up case of the law in the hands of irresponsible dramaticists that, if allowed to go unpunished, places the USA in position of a full step lower than the minimum our constitution rightfully provides and guarantees. That would be shameful. Throw the book at these self-righteous thugs.
that was jenny jones, not sally jesse raphael.
I think it comes down to entrapment. In these dateline cases (and this is from an ex-producer of the show who was let go for having issues with the entrapment) most times the decoy suggests the meeting, not the pedophile. I think that is the main difference between this and a checkpoint. The cops didn’t suggest you drive down I-95 after 5 beers so they could pull you over. I do have issue with the perps just talking to these kids that way, so don’t get me wrong.
In this case, if Conradt had gone to the house, they would not have needed a warrant. The issue is, for whatever reason he stopped communication with the decoy and would not committ to a meeting. Dateline then found out he was a lawyer and started to salivate at the idea of busting him on tv. They rushed a warrent on some iffy evidence (try googling Conradt’s supposed Myspace page that was starting to be deleted after the phone coversations according to NBC, when in fact the site hadn’t been touched in months) and went about the arrest the wrong, and in my opinion unconstitutional way, and he killed himself. I am not defending his crime, but I am saying NBC acted recklessly and contributed to his suicide. They also interjected themselves into a criminal investigation in order to get that ratings footage of a lawyer being caught.
on the door, and I blow my brains out, its their fault? Check these statistics
from RAINN regarding our children, daughters, wives and sisters:
Every two minutes, somewhere in America, someone is sexually assaulted.
One in six American women are victims of sexual assault, and one in 33 men.
In 2005-2006, there were an average annual 232,010 victims of rape, attempted rape or sexual assault.
About 44% of rape victims are under age 18, and 80% are under age 30.
Since 1993, rape/sexual assault has fallen by over 60%.
And we consider ourselves civilized? Where are the real men?
NBC crossed the line and screwed up what could have been a legit investigation. Due to their overstepping of boundaries the DA was forced to drop charges against EVERYONE arrested in this sting. So now people who were truly guilty got to walk. Congrats. A+ journalism.
I know it is difficult to look at this from a distance when something so emotional as pedophlia is involved, but no one here is arguing that pedophila is ok, that the people who perpetrate it should not be punished. The issue is the recklessness of NBC and those law officials. I think we are detracting from the real argument here by bringing up those statistics.
What’s the difference? Weren’t they all about the same?– Anything for ratings.
But I sure do appreciate you sharing
your apparant indepth knowledge of
talk show hosts. I declare, I don’t
know where without such gentlemen.
1. i’m a woman.
2. if you gonna spout your mouth off….at least be right.
Hey Dustin, thanks for the response.
I agree with what you are saying that this guy never went to the house they came to him….i guess i wan generalizing about the people who do go to the house….and with that in mind, in response to your first paragraph…maybe the decoy made the suggestion, but no one made these guys go to the house…no one made them buy the wine coolers and show up with their pants around their ankles. They chose to do that. much like i choose not to drink and drive but still have to go through a safety check.
maybe a better example would be female cops who dressed as prostitutes….i always kind of thought that was border line entrapment.
i guess ultimately…how can it be entrapment if you stop someone from breaking the law….what if the decoy was a real child and Dateline wasn’t there to stop anything from happening….because as i mentioned earlier…even if they didn’t suggest the meeting, no one MADE these guys show up to meet up with a 14 year old.
(but i do agree if all this guy was doing was talking nasty online….i don’t know why they had to break his door down.)
Nebraskan,
And exactly how would I know that?
You have my sincerest apologies. I
am sorry to have offended you with
my “mouth spouting”. I thought I was
just voicing my opinion–just as every-
one else is doing. But I guess, only
a select few are entitled to mistakes
and opinions in your view. And now
that I have been properly chastised
and corrected, I will endeavor to not
make the same mistake. But I will continue
to “spout out my mouth” as long as I
have strength in my fingers–freedom of
speech I believe it is called.
I don’t like the entrapment argument since, afterall, these guys were online talking to kids. I think the real problem with the Dateline issue is, it sensationalizes the whole affair and it normally results in no one being charged because of the entrapment. I certainly think that pedophiles should be caught and prosecuted. I don’t know about the whole female cop prostitue thing though. That is a bit iffy to me.
Is this why you always get banned at other sites, Southernbelle? Nebraskan originally kindly corrected you, and you got angry. Seems like a pattern. Shall I call David Rossimilier? :)
made the cowardly choice to take his own life instead of defending himself and clearing his FAMILY’S NAME. I know its not fashionable to think about honor, courage and respect in this day and age.
But if the honorable pedophile had sat on his couch and waited for the police to come in, he too would be in line for massive taxpayer lawsuit dollars over wrongful search and seizure. He could have explained why he was communicating with a child he didn’t coach, teach, or mentor. Adults don’t chat online with children, right? No reason to. He didn’t wait and tell his side. His act magnified the trouble he himself caused and now taxpayers have to pay to defend the actions of the police who are actually trying to protect children. As a man, I am outraged that another man, any man, would so hurt a child, or try to.
Kids need positive male role models, men who will teach boys to be men and who can teach girls how a man treats women. Kids do not need well off pedophiles who objectify other humans for their own sexual gratification.
Bob, you are correct about me insinuating he is guilty because of him sending emails back and forth to the ‘child’. However, if you read the other posts, it appears most everyone else is too. The people on COPS aren’t all criminals like you state. Most are one neighbor calling about another neighbor. You just found them guilty because someone called 911 by your comment they’re “catching real crooks”. They have the same rights as your pedophiles. You could have a point that someone was using his computer and fake name and making the email contact (isn’t it amazing how they tract it to his house?). However, then why when cops come to his door he blows his brains out? I’ve had the cops come to my door to ask if I knew who’s car was parked in front of my neighbors driveway, but I didn’t blow my brains out (I didn’t know why they were there until I answer the door and said hello). I have a feeling the judge that gave the arrest warrant looked at all the evidence closely before allowing something so national and high profile to happen. So I guess NBC held a gun to the Judges head to get the warrant so the guy could shoot himself. My guess is he was guilty because why would anyone shoot themselves for the police showing up? It wasn’t like it was being filmed live and him watching them on TV and them saying they were standing outside a pedophiles home. He had to wonder why they were there. I’d sure wonder if the cops showed up at my house as I have nothing to hide. So I take back my accusation, he wasn’t guilty, he was stupid and did us all a favor. If someone is that stupid to shoot themselves for a cop showing up at their door, car, work or whatever and they shoot themselves, they’re pretty dumb. Somebody get Jeff Foxworthy on the phone…you know you’re a redneck when…boom! Now that’s funny!
I’ve seen episodes of cops where they have female police officers hang out on streets to solicit sex…and if anyone so much as stops and says hi…they are busted for trying to hire a hooker….what’s the difference between that and this?
but i see your point…what good does it really do if all of these people are set free on a technicality.
thanks for the convo Dustin, have a good weekend!
Thank you Sandra. You know, this dude had the devil in him (whispering in his ear),
yes, go after the most vulnerable to do your sick, fiendish sex acts. Then, bite a gun if you’re caught. You’ll get out of having to face The Lord’s wrath…
ya, right. Thank you, father of lies. As for his sister, a 1 trillion dollar lawsuit
won’t change her brother’s decision making.
To my knowledge I have not been banned.
I don’t have time to visit alot of sites. And if someone using SouthernBelle has
been banned–It wasn’t this one. This is the first day that I have even responded
to any comments in almost two weeks.
And I was not angry. Not really. I just don’t watch talk shows like that and believe it or not I was thanking Nebraskan. Perhaps I chose the wording badly. I was trying to be coy.
I sincerely apologize. All the rest is just tongue in cheek attempt at wit.
The point I was making in my original post was that these types of media ambushes have bad history. GEE!
Actually, I would say now the public has to pay to defend because of the police force being incompetent and push overs to the rating mongers of Dateline. If they had done things by the book we might have all the answers. Again, the blame is not all on them as Conradt did pull the trigger. I am just saying the whole thing was botched. Also, dateline was outside the house for hours with their crew and equipment, it wasn’t like they just showed up and knocked on the door. There were calls from neighbors about “suspicious” people lurking in the neighborhood. He also shot himself when swat AND the film crew came into his house.
You should google your userid. I found some interesting stuff about someone who gets banned all the time and stuff. Also check out http://www.insurancecoverageblog.com to see someone using that alias. Have a good one.
The entrapment comes when the officer is the one to offer. If I walk up to a woman (who happens to be a cop) and say “Hey, you wanna **** for $100?” then they can bust me for soliciting; but if she says it it’s entrapment. Same thing here.
The difference between COPS and this is the way people are portrayed. COPS has been very careful to note that people are innocent until proven guilty, while “To Catch a Predator”, by its very title, portrays people as guilty unless proven innocent. I have seen a few shows and they build these guys up as guilty during the show. COPS also rarely releases names and blurs faces frequently in an effort to preserve identity and dignity. They hand out waivers like candy during shoots; you don’t sign, you’re blurred out. COPS is not about “catching” anyone, it’s about following police officers around on their normal day. Many COPS episodes have little or no actual “catching”, it’s a lot of dispute settling and “why did he run” and things of that nature – rather boring considering what Hollywood portrays a normal cop day to be.
Confusing the issue at stake in this suit with the issue of pedophilia does not help settle it. We don’t know if the guy was a pedophile. We do know that his name will now be forever tarnished (and still would have been had he been proven innocent) and that NBC may well have materially contributed to his death. NBC needs to stand up and defend their actions in court.
Thanks, I guess I will be changing. It
irks me a little. I have been called
SouthernBelle since college. It’s the
dialect and accent of my speech that got
me the nickname.
And again I do apologize. I guess I just
am not good at this. Bye Now!
We will find out if indeed the police and Dateline did anything wrong. It truly remains to be seen. The damage caused by men (mostly) who insist on having sex with children is measurable, widespread and far-reaching. The out-of-wedlock birth rates in our country now approach 40%. There is some reason women are not marrying the fathers of children at a rate unprecedented in our country. I believe that part of the problem is that we are not teaching our daughters the correct sequence of events with regard to sex, procreation, education, the workplace, and marriage. And I think many things contribute to the problem, including how easily accessible our kids are to complete strangers. We are out of tilt, and half our population thinks we solve these types of problems by throwing money at them. The absence of fathers in the lives of children leave the kids vulnerable to those who would exploit them. I’d like the lawyer to come to my house and try to gain access to my daughter. He would learn the value of a positive role model in the life of MY daughter. I think its time to call out these losers who value orgasm over whats best for the community.
So we have a suicidal, “potential” child molester, in a position of authority; making a decision not to defend themselves of the charges; and then commits the selfish act of taking their own life and leaving loved ones deal with the situation on their own. Then the family wants some money for their anguish.
I would be angry, but angry that someone I trusted so much is showing up at teens home’s, whether he was out for sex, or not. I would wonder that if I had kids whether they would have been safe left in his care when he babysat. I don’t blame the family for wanting money, as they have been through much. I blame the juries that rob Peter to pay Paul.
I started reading thru the many e-mails on this subject, but grew tired, so decided to add my own. — Since when does a television station decided when and how a law enforcement agency should act. If any entity is liable for the man’s suicide 9except himself), it would be the Law enforcement agency and the judge who issued the warrant. They are the “experts” on the law. —- On an another note, remember the axion: “They do not hang men because they stole horses, they hang them, so other men won’t steal horses”. NBC has “to catch a predator”, so other men won’t think of hooking up with a underage girl. – one other note, did they show what e-mails were passed between the suicider and the decoy? If he did send lewd comments, then he was guilty of a crime. & finally, if he was an agent of the Court, I would suspect that he had enough muscle to wipe the stain of any DATELINE story on him, and possibly expose DATELINE for their “dirty tactics”
If you have seen the show, it is online chat logs, not email that is collected as evidence. There are chat rooms that are frequented by pedophiles. Perverted Justice monitors the chat rooms, and poses as underage children. Someone contacted NBC, possibly Perverted Justice, and stated that there are adults propositioning children with sex in these chat rooms and nothing is being done about it. Many local enforcement outfits are not technologically savvy, and the FBI doesn’t usually get involved unless the crime crosses state lines. I guess someone wondered whether there was a story in whether these perverts would follow through with their chat and actually show up at the house to meet the child. Dateline thought it would be interesting to interview these people and ask them “what was going through your mind before you came here?”
Law enforcement was not originally involved, as it was originally an attempt to figure out why an adult would just show up at a teen’s home with condoms or alcohol that they had just met in a chat room. There was a lot of public outrage after the initial episodes that the people were just allowed to leave after being confronted, and law enforcement asked to be part of the process. The people that are convicted are usually charged with soliciting to have sex with a minor, not actual sex contact.
I also believe that the person involved with this case was never convicted of anything because he killed himself before any trial. I don’t believe the court was going to try him after his death. He could have fought the charges, but I guess he didn’t choose to.
You know, just because of this guys status, a lawsuit is being entertained. What about all of those other sick sobs that prey on our children through the internet – maybe they should all sue too for defamation of character etc. That guy’s guilt or shame from being CAUGHT was what prompted his suicide. Those pedophiles on that show deserve each and everything that comes to them.
I watched the special. I’m convinced by the evidence that was presented that the man was probably guilty. I think that he saw the case was indefensible, and took the only easy way out. Of course, he may not have been guilty and just thought that whether or not the case was proved, the accusation and publicity would be enough to wreck his life, we’ll never know. What I do see now, is the usual wrongful death ******** I see every time we work a fatality. Folks we’re all going to die. I hate to remind you, but it’s on our planners, albeit with a “tentative” date. For whatever reason, the man decided to pick his own date and circumstances, and no, NBC, The Police Dept, Dr Ruth, no one but he himself pulled the trigger.
Was he a pedophile ? I don’t know, but he is square with the house now, whether he was guilty and avoiding punishment, or innocent and unwilling to trust himself to the system he was a part of, he is dead, and whatever he did or didn’t do is between him and his God, and giving someone a lot of money is not going to change anything.
There are a bunch of men out there who are not true Pedaphiles but have been tittilatd by the junk on the Internet. They then get caught up in the Crack Cocaine of the Internet — child sex porn. These folks indulge in secret, without ever coming in contact with reality other than the exploitive viewing of abuse. They can’t stop the addiction and they are freaking out because there is no where to turn. When they come to the attention of the media or cops they commit suicide. The suicide rate among such arrests is the highest of any known group.
OK, to start, I am a father with several daughters. The language he used alone is enough to get him arrested for indecency with a child. The suggestions and descriptions of the acts he wanted to commit AFTER her knew the “girl” was “14” is also a charge of intent of criminal sexual assault of a child in Texas. That he was a lawyer shows he knew that what he was doing was a punishable crime but he continued despite this knowledge. That NBC acted irresponsibly in the pursuit of sensationalism is the basis of the suit. I agree with all these points. And if found guilty, I believe NBC should be held accountable for the wrongs they commited. I DO NOT however, believe that NBC should be held responsible for the choice Conradt made in taking his own life. His reason and justification died with him. That is the choice HE made. Now, along comes his sister and wants 100 million because her brother killed himself? What justifies this? Because NBC has the money? She, in my opinion at this point based on what I have heard, is just as guilty as NBC of wanting to cash in on her brother’s infamy and crimes. There was irrefutable evidence of his commiting as least two punishable crimes of sexual indecency with what he thought was a child. Entrapment? Did she ask him to talk dirty or if he wanted sex? Not in the transcripts I have read. I feel responsibility here lies with the police for allowing themselves to be prodded to act unprofessionally, and with the judge for allowing himself to be coerced into issueing a warrant for the arrest. They are, however, only human regardless of their position and money and fame is a compelling incentive. I am not exonerating anyone or excusing anyone’s actions. My greivance is with the sister. She doesn’t deserve to profit from her brother’s death and I feel her asking for so much is her going for the brass ring and hoping to get a sympathetic jury to assure her comfortable future.
I think you nailed it regarding the sister, Dad. Good post.
COMMON SENSE. WHAT HAPPENED TO IT? SUE A TV SHOW FOR MAKING A DIFFERENCE IN THE FIGHT AGAINST PEDAPHILES, WHATS HAPPENING TO THIS COUNTRY? IM A MOM OF 4 AND I THINK JUSTICE FREVAILED IN THIS CASE. ONE LESS PEDAPHILE TO ATTACK OUR KIDS, THATS A GOOD THING. NBC DID NOTHING WRONG THE WEIRDO DID. THEN HE SHOT HIMSELF- TO BAD HE DIDNT TAKE HIS SISTER WITH HIM.
No one commented on your post Gil, but I think that its right on. We as a society have sex turned on its ear. Single moms are seen as heroic for having a baby without a dad, but a kid needs the impact of both parents to become a fully formed adult. Men who weren’t given any form of sexual education now look at kiddie porn and then some want to take it a step further. And the sex ed of “everything is ok and you can’t make judgements about another persons sexual beliefs and feelings doesn’t count”. Don’t tell me its not true because 3 of my kids have gone through sex ed and have had this drilled into their heads-and what they have learned-that there is no right or wrong if 2 people consent isn’t what I learned in public schools in the 70’s-that sex is a responsibility not a freedom and that there are consequences for having sex when you shouldn’t-just like we learned about responsibility in driveers ed and about drinking and smokin in health aren’t applied today.
As a result, we are growing several generations of adults who have some really screwed up ideas about sex-and we’ll see this more and more until we go back to bassics and teach our kids correctly.
I expect to get bashed for some of what I’m going to type.
I do have to stand up for the men – according to the Administration for Children and Families women are equal opportunity abusers. 40% of all abusers are mothers (http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm05/figure3_5.htm). Granted this covers all maltreatment, but we need to stop focusing on men and focus on what truly matters – education and protection of our children. As I recall the past few high-profile cases of teachers having sex with students have been female teachers preying on male students.
We need to make it undesireable to have children out of wedlock. We need to stop supporting people who make bad decisions. We need to stop allowing predators back on the street. What two consenting adults do behind closed doors is their business; but once you bring a child into it it’s the community’s business.
While we’re at it we need to make the laws regarding the age of consent realistic. I heard a story within the last year of two boys (18 or 19) who went to prison and are now registered sex offenders because they received oral sex from girls within a couple years of their age. The one I remember best was an 18-year old boy and 17-year old girl, because it was so asinine. Granted, it’s illegal, but we need to make the laws more realistic.
I could go on longer, but need to eat my lunch.
Lastbat,
I believe that was in Georgia that you are talking about. It was a black male, and apparently the state changed the statuary law to remove charges if the 2 were within 2 years of each other, or something to that effect. The real trouble came when they refused to reduce his sentence, since the violation occurred before the law changed. It was a pretty messed up situation, in my opinion.
could you please enter the race for presidency so i can finally decide whom i am going to vote for. i agree with everything you said. well done.
What do the last several posts have to do with the money hungry *itch trying to capitalize on her brother’s perversion and ultimately cowardly demise?
wedlock…
such as gay lesbian couples having or adopting children?
such as women abandoned or murdered when the bio. fathers they learn of their pregancies?
How about professional women who do not want a husband but want a child…
Homosexuals should be allowed to marry – thus they could have children inside of wedlock. Easy one that.
Roe v Wade gives women the right to opt out of parenthood, we need to give men the right to opt out of parenthood. If he doesn’t want children and makes that known, he shouldn’t be on the hook when his genes get hijacked.
As for professional women – a single parent is a single parent. Children are, generally speaking, more well rounded when raised by mother and father.
I’m not saying people can’t have children out of wedlock, we just need to make it undesireable. For instance, how many women would have children by men who don’t want children if the man didn’t have to pay child support? I don’t know the answer to that, but a good guess is fewer. Now for those that scream “Child support is necessary!” I say it should be paid only if he wanted the child. This means women will have to be as careful about choosing their men as men are about choosing their women. They’ll have to talk. They’ll have to take precautions.
I don’t know yet what I believe should happen in cases of divorce, except that joint-custody should be standard with no alimony and no child support in those cases. Because if the man has the child half the time, and the woman has the child half the time, why should anyone pay support?
It’s all about making people resonsible for their decisions.
Just when you thought the thread was dead, lastbat bring up the “a” word. Here we go…. :) Just messing with you.
I like where you’re going, lastbat… but good luck getting there.
Unfortunately, for ages and ages a huge number of people have failed to make good choices when it comes to sexual partners. Beyond that, they don’t make good choices when it comes to protection either.
You would think having a child as a teen or without financial means is already an extremely undesireable situation. But apparently it’s still not undesireable enough to keep people from producing kids.
Other than eliminating child support (that so many single/divorced parents don’t receive anyway) what else do you think would be effective against the problem?
We can’t exactly go in people’s homes and say “don’t sleep with that person because you’re not married and you might accidentally get knocked up”. I’m sure you’re not proposing that as a solution… but just sayin… what more can be done?
On the extremes (which some days I support) there are several ideas.
Put contraceptives in municipal water supplies. This has the downside of not being chemically feasible as there are too many potential reactions. It would also be bypassed by the rich who could afford their own water source.
License parenting. We force people to ask the government for permission to marry, why not to have kids? The upside is you can fine people and put them in jail for breaking the law. The downside is it’s more government intervention in my life and I’m trying to minimize that intervention.
Government raised children. Have whatever kids you want, but you won’t be raising them. They will go to a government facility and you will probably never see them again. Up side is you don’t have to worry about single parents anymore. The down side is the same as above – plus a million other things.
Ultimately we need to exert societal pressure. Men should stop dating single mothers and women should stop dating single fathers. These people (in most cases) have already shown they make poor judgement calls.
I do support sterilization efforts. We as a society need to support sterilization. This could mean somebody setting up a foundation to provide free tubal ligation and vasectomies to people, or it could mean local governments providing sterilization at clinics.
Mandate DNA testing for every live birth. I heard a statistic from Marc Rudov (I haven’t verified it yet) that more than 20% of all births to wedded couples are not the husband’s child. He should know that and not be on the hook for any support legally. If he wants to support the child, fine, but he shouldn’t be required to.
The problem with making single-parenthood undesireable is that it affects the children. They are caught in the mess their parents created. American society must have an honest and open discussion about this and realize that to reverse our current trend we need to push for true equality among the sexes (which we don’t have in the least) and that reversing this trend will mean taking away benefits that currently help some children, but by doing so will discourage others from putting children in their place.
This post has gone on way too long. I apologize.
I agree we have taken a detour, but I do take issue with you calling the sister a money grubbing @#$@@!. She may be for all I know, but then again she might not. I do agree the amount of money is pretty ridiculous, but I am more concerned with what she does if she wins. You also have to think about why she is suing and whom she is suing. If NBC is to take notice and get hit where it hurts, the amount of money should be quite a bit (since they are a large company and a few million is chump change to them). The end result, from what I have read, is to keep Dateline from sticking their noses into police investigations and get back to journalism, not sentastionalism that can endanger lives. I don’t condone what Conradt did, but I also don’t condone the actions of Dateline and Chris Hansen. Unfortunately, in this day the only way to stop a big company from doing things like this is to hit them where it hurts: the wallet and in the media. I think this lawsuit does both, and until we see what she does with the money (if she wins that is) we can’t truly know her means. It is pretty easy to demonize her (even easier to demonize him!) but it is much harder to put yourself in her shoes and see things from her perspective. Hopefully she will put the money towards rehabilitation of child sex offenders, or fund rehabilitation for the children since they are harmed so much by this. I only hope in the process she doesn’t keep the money and I wish some lawyer didn’t have to get rich.
Conversations do that sometimes. It’s just the way discussions go.
Personally, I would get very bored with life if I were only allowed to discuss one topic at a time with people. Who wants to live in a box like that?
If I’ve violated some sort of “off topic” rule here, I’m sorry. I guess I’m not one of those people who has a problem with talking about a variety of subjects at one time. My bad.
KLS, there are no rules about these posts except the common rules of decent behaviour as far as I know. No need to apologise to me I was attempting to inject a bit of levity into the thread and making a “sideways” comment about the turns it has taken.
Dustin, I live near Terrell and know the family. I know her and I know her motivations, they are the same now they have been all her life. MONEY. I know that of which I speak. I will reinerate, I don’t see where sueing NBC will teach the police and the jude any lesson about keeping the law under THEIR control instead of allowing money and other influences to coerce them into violating a person’s rights or due process of the law.