blonde poker forum

This airs tomorrow (Wednesday) on Ch 4.

It tells the tale of a chap who poses as a young girl on the internet, who lures ill-intended men to his house, & then films them & posts the stuff on Facebook, where he has 100,000 followers.

Allegedly, at least 10 convictions have resulted from his "sting".

One man, who got "caught", committed suicide.

Previews from The Independent & Mail are below, but every newspaper has run the story.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/the-paedophile-hunter-vigilantes-success-adds-to-pressure-for-greater-police-resources-in-child-sex-crackdown-9763501.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2774429/Documentary-paedophile-hunter-vigilante-force-police-devote-time-covert-operations-catch-offenders.html


Are such vigilantes, generrally, a good thing, or a bad thing?


This is the vigilante, Hunter Stinson.


(http://i4.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article4345789.ece/alternates/s615/The-Paedophile-Hunter.jpg)

You can also go to You Tube & search for "Hunter Stinson" to see how he operates, there are numerous vidous by him, in fact he has his own You Tube Channel, with scores of "expose's".

quiet day in front of you tikay? not a lot to do?

jeez....

lol

(http://anupadin.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/bomb.png)

Well hopefully we have enough intelligent & reasoned members here able to debate this in an adult manner. It's not politics or religion.

I hope it does not cause a ruck, & I'm sorry if it does, but I think it is a really interesting matter as to whether vigilantes are a good thing.

Parents, of course, may see it differently to non-parents. 

 

ok i'll start

I come from a more libertarian viewpoint that such vigilantes should not be encouraged, and in this instance i speak as the father of a teenage girl

Vigilantes in essence make their own laws and act upon them, despite that Vigilante action can be prosecuted both under laws relating to incitement and also public order legislation

Not onl might a vigilante group be utterly useless in terms of law enforcement but it is also highly likely that they are actually harming children rather than protecting them.

By getting in the way of legitimate police action against suspected offenders, they can run the risk of undermining any legitimate police investigation or subsequent court action and thus of allowing suspected paedophiles to go free and possibly to abuse children.

Of course the other viewpoint is one that will be popular, especially with suspected paedophiles, that the police don't do enough, that the offense is reprehensible and that this helps protect the innocent etc


--

on a different issue, the MP caught sending pictures to the "girl" in the newspaper sting, I come out pretty firmly against the newspaper

of course the MP was stupid, but the entrapment was the worse "offence" to my mind particularly using photos of real people only posted on social media that day to do their business for them

Vigilantes are a liability. String em up I say.

Regarding your second point I'm pretty amazed at the willingness of people to send naked/semi naked pics to people they hardly know.

One of my work colleagues is hitting the dating sites pretty hard at the moment as he is single, every time I meet up with him he has new pics of several birds that have sent him pics and they barely know him!

Thanks for the heads-up Tikay - when I'm noncing on the internet now I'll remember to ask for a live webchat with the girl so I know it's not just this guy.

Have watched some of his Youtube stuff before

So far his evidence alone has ended up with 10 convictions (believe there have been many more for "people" who the police were already onto)

Cant see how that can ever be a bad thing personally

Love this stuff.

To catch a predator is in it's 11th season right now and whilst repetitive is interesting to watch.

So many teachers or more weirdly guys who have just become fathers.

Sounds like an interesting watch. Like pleno said there's a lot of guys who you wouldn't expect to be involved in this sort of stuff who are. I worked on a summer camp with a guy who is now banged up for this sort of thing.

On the one hand I think vigilante-ism is wrong, on the other hand I kind of admire this guy and other vigilantes. He is only trying to save kids.

Essentially though it just shows that the police/government aren't good enough at both finding and punishing these sick people.

Watched some of the clips on YouTube, got to give the guy and his team credit for having the balls to challenge the guys in this way. Hopefully the documentary will explain why he decided to start this "campaign".

On a similar point I thought about this subject a lot recently after a conversation a had at Luton. Some guys were talking about a vicar that played at the casino regularly, who had been named in the local paper as being found guilty of "obscene conversations with Children", on enquiring who it was I googled him to see if I knew him, the picture that came up confirmed I (and many others as he was a regular) had played with this guy quite a lot ( even after he had been charged and suspended from work, which of course nobody knew at the time). One of the guys at the table was very irate about the whole thing, particularly as he had tried to get back into the casino after he had been banned (I'm presuming for his own safety as well as for the benefit of the rest of the customers). I actually felt quite numb about the whole situation, he was a normal guy, no reason to think any different, I distinctly remember him talking to a very attractive masseuse a lot, I remember thinking he must have no chance with her. All the while portraying a life similar to most of us, yet lurking in this underworld of vile intentions. Since been wondering what he would have said had he been challenge about this at the table.

Yeah i've watched quite a few of these. Kinda rubbish TV, but keeps my simple mind entertained on occasions.

Think this is the key point.  The vigilantes would be out of a job if the state did their job well enough and devoted enough resources to it.

This

While authorities lack the funds/committment/wherewithall to persue these people, it becomes inevitable society will find the resources to do it themselves.

TBH, I would push it a little further in so much as, In essence, it's wrong, but very much like hanging, if the vigilante digs out 20 bad uns, but 1 person with reasonable doubt gets wrongly put away, then crack on.

this is going way too far. Exactly this reason why capital punishment was abolished here, as of course there are many examples of miscarriages of justice

your point about official resources might be right but you simply cannot condone someone being wrongly put away like this, its especially amoral.

oh adz!  What if that one person is you?

Wouldn't be putting myself in the situation to be.

Gotta be looking at or doing some very dodgy stuff to get implicated in any way, by my reckoning.

Take away his Vigilante status and put him on the pay roll therefore controlling what goes viral. Doubt this would happen as maybe part of why he does this is for the fame.

Looking at incidence of crime in terms of how close that number is to zero is a wildly unrealistic metric imo.

If the guys intentions were entirely pure I'd expect him to turn the evidence over to the police rather than have some nice little graphics made up for his youtube videos and a banner ready for when the show airs. I'm sure he'll end up with a boatload of subscribers and nice little bit of ad revenue. If his aim was to put as many predators behind bars as possible, the last thing he'd do is make a documentary and out his identity.

Add to that the fact that he's outing these people on youtube before they've even been given a fair trial, I'd say he's lucky that he hasn't ended up behind bars for a third go around. The evidence that he provides is pretty damning and its so tough to keep a level head about such an emotive issue (I obv can only imagine how a parent would feel) but the judicial process is something that represents how the people of this country want crimes to be dealt with and one guy circumventing this process and outing people on youtube is an affront to the protections that should be available to everyone.

He only has to be wrong once to irreversibly destroyed an innocent persons life. If the accused is found guilty then by all means throw away the key, but to call this guy some sort of white knight for the people and the kids is pretty warped imo.

Probably not the most popular opinion but he's unemployed, has spent 10 years at her majestys pleasure and he burned down a school. Definitely not a net tax contributor so I'll at least have Woodsey and Camel on my side ;)

The nut result of all this is that he gets a job with the police/child protective services

A few years ago I was called for jury service and was foreman on a child sex absuse case. Long story short the ex-wife of the accused had a daughter from a previous marriage and two kids with the accused. She won custody of the two children that they had together in the divorce but decided to extort him for more money on top of agreed child support, wouldn't let him see his children etc. Once the last penny ran out these historical abuse accusations surface, dating back to when his then step-daughter was 13/14.

The guy ends up going through a two year ordeal fighting these accusations, we found him not guilty of 9 counts of indecent or sexual assault on a minor after 15 minutes of deliberation. I spoke to him and his new mrs outside the court after and alright he wasn't the sharpest knife in the drawer but as far as I could tell he was just a regular guy.

If anyone that was innocent of such crimes would never put themselves in a situation to be wrongfully accused, shouldn't be just save the expense of an investigation and trial and just lock 'em up?

Dan Morgan for PM

Interesting article

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/25/vigilante-paedophile-hunters-online-police

Got to question the motives of the bloke.

Sitting on a computer trying to persuade blokes to make a mistake which will potentially ruin their life forever.

Just utterly strange behaviour.

He seems like a predator himself, targeting lonely and vulnerable men.

At the very least he's a loser looking for publicity and notoriety. I don't wish to consider what his motives might be if they are darker.

Vigilantes are not to be encouraged. Leave it to the police IMO.

That is a great Post, especially the enboldened part.

I think you have explained what was lurking in the back of my mind, & why I felt so uncomfy with the whole thing.

....and so is that.

Anyway, the Show is on tonight, for those still interested.

Watched almost all his videos.

He's preying on lonely old men who aren't looking for 14 year old girls but are usually flattered that somebody finds them attractive. Or if they send 80 messages out to girls and 1 replies they are so happy then they are told they are 14 they feel like they are still wanted etc

Obviously not making excuses for them but a lot of the cases are blown out if proportion.

Nothing wrong with a bit of vigilantism imo, but guys like this I woudn't class as vigilantes. 

Its a bit like the EDL/SDL boys who fancy themselves as football hooligans but never made it with any firm so they become hooligans of sorts. 

Community payback is good when the cops/courts aren't doing much. 

When I was younger we used to batter know house breakers in our area even if they weren't caught in the act.  Cops used to let them go for some cheap info on 2 bob hash dealers that everyone knew. 

Got sentenced to 2 years today.

Paedophiles are surely the worst human beings out there. Anything that means less of them on the streets abusing children can only be a good thing imho.

But as pointed out previously by some erudite posters, his actions and vigilantism doesn't necessarily mean fewer child abusers on the streets.

Ignoring the issue of child abuse for a minute, the paedophile hunter himself just came across as your average bullying thug. This was shown a lot but particularly in the bit where he was literally threatening and enticing people to assault that guy as he followed him through Nuneaton, which served precisely zero purpose other than to intimidate him. This sort of 'career path' he's picked enables him to do that and justify it and there's no way he wasn't getting a kick out of it. As far as vigilantes go he was far from a heroic one imo.

Felt like I needed a shower after watching that programme.

Don't know who creeped me out more, the men turning up with a bottle of Lambusco for a cosy night of chinese food, scary movies and nookie with their 13 year old lovers or Stinson himself.

"I could beat this dog to within an inch of her life and she'd still running come to me. Not that I would, like".

Sordid, horrible television programme.

Stinson Hunter has got a kickstarter site, where people can donate to his cause.

Now we find out the real motive for his crusade.

Making a few quid on top of his benefit money.

Hope it gets taxed  :)

I think the problem is that generally they are not on the street openly abusing children it is done in the children's own home often by people known to them and therefore it is not likely to stopped by this sort of action. As a father of two young children I would agree it is the worst crime but not sure I can agree with vigilantes. There have been enough stories in the past of people being wrongly identified and attacked.

Would you shoot ten men each morning if nine were innocent and one was a pedophile?

Was it a slam dunk verdict where the ex wife's motives are clear?  If so did the ex wife get punished in this case?  I imagine not but live in hope.

This is the most powerful argument against the death penalty.

I would have thought even the most hard right wingers can not defend the death penalty against these words.

Doesn't seem to stop the Americans killing plenty of innocent men every year though.

I guess the debate against the death penalty is more "if you killed 100 men and 98 were child killers would that be acceptable"?  Surely it's a given that a justice system must have a high level of competence before a death penalty can even be considered.

Thought it was a really interesting piece and I'm a bit surprised by the general reaction to it. Seems most people have looked at the guy and judged him on appearance and thought ,tattooed up, face jewellery ex con tricking men into getting caught with young girls.'

Why would it be different if he was a policeman who headed a dept doing exactly the same?

Think they interviewed an ex policeman who used to trawl thru sites posing as a young girl having conversations with men and said himself that even when he told them he was in his early teens there were still sexually motivated conversations. If a team of police had the time to do this and had convicted 10 men that would be a good thing wouldn't it?

The guy himself has said he doesn't think most of the men he catches are paedophiles.

He is targeting insecure, lonely and pathetic men and tricking them into making a mistake which they will regret for the rest of their lives.

I don't have much sympathy for these guys, they are obviously the bottom of a very sordid barrel.

But I don't get all this bestowing hero status on Stinson Hunter.

He's just the other side of the same coin IMO

Not sure i agree with this. It's not so much that the guy is targeting 'lonely and pathetic men'. From what I gathered he would just set up an online profile and wait for these people to contact him. It's not like he was actively persuing old men and thrusting these fictional children upon them. Furthermore, it's one thing to fantasize about persons significantly younger than youself, but to actively search for them online and then not only have extended communications with those persons, but to also make the effort to go to their houses (one can only assume to engage in sexual activities with these minors) is a quite significant step to take. Imo it's pretty sick to have fantasies or fetishes about under-age people, but to actively pursue them and show willingness to engage in illegal activities with them is pretty sick and in my mind they can be branded paedophiles at that level of involvement.

Fwiw having just watched the first episode of this, seems like this Stinson bloke could certainly do a much more professional job of what he is doing, which would help his cases be more admissible in court. I'd certainly want a bit more physical protection if i were him too! I know on the American show 'To Catch A Predator' it's done much more securely, with security staff positioned in case anything goes wrong and they link their efforts with local police, who wait outside to arrest the guys after clear evidence has been gathered. I quite like the lower budget version to be honest, but it would work better if more focus was given to the ultimate goal of his work, which has to be getting solid evidence and allowing maximum sentences to be passed forward. It's all well and good 'bypassing all the red tape' as he put it, but if it leads to minimal sentences and evidence being unusable, it's a bit anticlimactic

Yeah, I don't doubt these guys are scumbags.

But they probably answer 100s of ads on these sites, and it is so rare to get a response from the women except for ads from porn sites, that they don't give a damn who they are talking to.

most of the guys are on 18+ sites, they aren't on these sites looking for girls, they are looking for women. they are often ugly and can't get any responses due to the huge male:female ratio and thus the old cougars picking all the younger guys and then they finally get a message from a girl (using 18+ photos btw) messaging them how great they look and then in the next message after they are very exctied (mentally and physically i assume) they are told they are 15.

its pretty bad imo.

This.

If he was trawling a One Direction fan site or Moshi Monsters looking for scumbags to trap, then go ahead, you'd be doing a valuable job.

Doing it on 18+ websites is just entrapment I think.

If this guy was pretending to be 7 or 8 and hooking in fellas then he'd be catching some proper nonces - these guys are low grade, more Graham Rix or Jimmy Page than Gary Glitter or Ian Watkins.

And they are getting exposed to an extent way beyond what their crime deserved.

Twitter was carnage last night with hundreds of people demanding these guys got life sentences or shooting.

If the justice system deems it appropriate these guys only got suspended sentences, then it is obvious they are the absolute timid end of the nonce scale.

Although I must admit I was surprised that Roger didn't have to face charges. His crime seemed easily the worst of those highlighted. (Although this could just be the way the programme was edited)

Here's another angle to this. An ex colleague of mine had a boyfriend who was around the 30 mark when she was only 14 years old. I was wtf when she told me, but she basically said she was 100% for it and doesn't think there was anything wrong with it to this day because it was her decision to see this older guy for a while.

She might have been all for it, but he should have known better!

Were they shagging?

Whatever, something seriously wrong with a 30 year old having a relationship with a 14 year old. What can they possibly have in common?

Yeah I think so. I pretty much suggested as such to her, but she just shrugged her shoulders and told me she didn't see the problem as she wasn't pressured or anything and wanted it.

Bizarre.

But it does show that blokes who are attracted to 14 and 15 year olds aren't (necessarily) paedos.

This subject isn't as black and white as some people would like to think.

There's lots of grey areas and that's why what Stinson is doing is wrong.

How old is she now to still have this view that it's ok?

i know as a young solider my biggest fear was the fact the girls as young as 14 were frequenting the pubs and clubs, as i was often in strange towns i wouldnt have a clue if they told me they were 18 i would have to believe them, but by the time i was in mid 20s early 30s i would be looking for women rather than 18 year olds so it would become easier by 30 getting involved with a 14 year old would of been unthinkable

but here is something that popped up on my news feed today 2 female teachers have a threesome with a 16 year old student and getting arrested!!!!!!!

1 he was 16 and 2 how many 16 year old males would fantasize about a threesome with 2 older women (not my teachers there were never this good looking)

http://uniladmag.com/articles/two-teachers-arrested-threesome-male-student/

Mid 40's, but this was a good 10 years ago she told me.

Be interesting if she had daughter, who came home one day at 14, and told her she was sleeping with a bloke in his 30s.

Of course she wouldn't be happy, and I doubt her parents didn't knew what she was up to back then.

This is the thing.  There are thousands of 15/16 year old lads shagging 15 year old girls as normal 'bf/gf' relationships.  Less 17/18 year old boys doing it with 15 year old girls under similar circumstances but it still happens a lot (it did at my school anyway 25 years ago).  As you get upwards of 19/20 for the man/boy it obvious happens a lot less however when it is illegal and not illegal for this to happen?  I assume in all 3 cases it's illegal and the boy is committing an offense?

Whilst there is undoubtedly a massive grey area surrounding girls that are 14-15 the point of the law is that they arent in a position to consent or understand the pressure they may be under and how to deal with that.  That is almost certainly an oversimplification especially when you are talking about fairly small age differences but ultimately you have to legislate somewhere and the current age of 16 seems fair enough to me and it seems reasonable to think that she wasnt really in a position to understand the implications of her actions and his motives when she was 14 and he was 30.

She might well have lied about her age when they met and looked older than she was, I have no idea. As people are suggesting these things are not always black and white.

John Peel in his book blithely mentions he had an affair with a 15 year old girl when he was in his 30s.

When all the Savile stuff came out one of the newspapers tracked her down.

She was absolutely fine with it all these years later

But it is still the responsibility of the adult to restrain themselves.

But whether they are nonces as the majority of viewers of yesterday's programme seemed to believe is very doubtful IMO.

Didn't some Guy have the shit kicked out of him simply because he had the same name as a convicted paedophile and someone wrongly accused him and it escalated from that?

Yeah and there was a big protest out the house of a paediatrician in Portsmouth too.

there was a paediatrician's  house burnt down in Wales once as well i remember reading

This whole paedo thing is becoming a massive witch-hunt, and it's extremely disturbing. Completely sure they've wrongly convicted a few people, just because if its a choice between potentially letting a pedophile go and effectively killing someone, they'll sleep easier choosing the former. Better to be safe than sorry.

This guy can't possibly be good, the police have similar things set up which have set rules and trained people doing the same job. This guy doesn't have any of that training or any rules, as Camel said in an earlier post he's basically a predator himself, and as Pleno said he's preying on people who are just lonely and probably wouldn't have broken the law if this guy hadn't basically forced them to.

Absolutely jail them, but leave it to the professionals.  

A bunch of chavs looking for weak and pathetic people to bully.

Having said all that if anyone laid a finger on Jake, I swear I wouldn't be able to control my myself in response.

Being a father makes for an interesting clash of emotions as a pinko liberal wet.

how would you feel in a few years time when he was 15/16 if he came home bragging about having a threesome with 2 women in the late 20s early 30s?

Astonished no one has referenced Brasseye yet. I've reread the thread again just in case I'd missed a subtle reference.

No "This man disguised himself as a school", no "statistically, paedophiles have more in common with crabs than they do with people like you and me", not even a "suggestible keyboard".

Amazing. It's incredible how brilliant and incisive that programme was.

This is the thing i would guess the vast majority of dads would say quietly without mum hearing 'wp gg son' whereas if it was a daughter they would go mental.  That's just society for you.

And what if the lad was gay and it's 2 older blokes? A different reaction by most I would suggest...

I'd be furious.

If I had a daughter, I'd be furious.

I'd be furious.

That's fair enough Camel but i would imagine a lot of dad's would quietly think it was ok for his son to have a bit of fun with two older birds (far more so than the other way around)

Which one of us wouldn't have given our right arm for a punt lol.  ;danafish;

To be honest Keith, much as I admire you, that is the problem with so many issues in this country/the world.

Too many people have a watered down attitude to justice, maybe because so many bad things happen/or they never see it happening to them, but if it does happen to them or on their doorstep, its a whole different kettle of fish.

I think before people think "that's a bit harsh" "human rights" blah blah, "the what if it happened to me" test should be applied.

Sure we would get some different attitudes and laws then.

Or I hope we would, anyway.

15/early 16 I think an adult shouldn't be touching a child.

Late 16/17 I wouldn't be so bothered unless it was with a teacher.

I don't think teacher/pupil relationships are ever acceptable. Even if the pupil is 18+

Far too easy for the teacher to be exploiting someone they should be responsible for.

What about a male teacher who is 22 straight out of uni dating a girl in the upper sixth who is 18 and a half by the summer of her alevels who he doesn't teach directly in any class at the school but just happens to teach at the same school as her?

Then the same example but the male teacher teaches at a different school in the same town?  

In both situations they met legally in a bar/club in said town at the weekend

The reason i ask was this happened to a friend of my at uni in 1997.  He started dating a girl in the upper sixth who was attending a different school to the one he taught in in the same town.

I'm as certain as I could be if someone murdered a loved one I still would be against the death penalty.

Paedophilia is different - brings out the rawest of emotions.

But that is why I don't think victims and victims families should ever have any say on punishment for the perpetrator.

I'm talking about a teacher who actually teaches the pupil. In your case it would be cool.

A female friend of mine was married to a University lecturer

They were in their 40s when he left her for a 19 year old student he was tutoring.

Disgusting betrayal of his responsibilities IMO

John Peel married a 15 year old.  I think there is something seriously wrong with a 30 year old and a 14 year old girl and don't think it is a grey area at all.  Grey areas are when the boy is 16 and the girl 14 or vice versa.  I'd likely find a prosecution ridiculous in those cases.

It is funny that we are conditioned a bit by wear we are born. I remember seeing a 2 plus 2 where they were discussing some 16 year old (can't remember who).  There was a real clash between those born in countries/ states where the age of consent is 16 and those where it is 18.  Half of Europe will be like Wtf is wrong with 15?  Despite that the 30/14 thing should be wrong everywhere.

Am kind if hopeful I will let most of the mistakes my daughters make just go.  We all did them in our youth.

I'd imagine you would have played at the same tables as this guy quite a few times Vinny? Glad to hear he got a custodial sentence, all still feels a bit strange that he carried on coming to the casino after he had been charged and suspended from work. Quite a few of the guys were very upset about the whole thing, can't imagine what would have happened if rumours were to have started while he was still playing (nearly every night as far as I know)

This is what I mean about paedos.

To my knowledge I have played poker with 3 murderers and no one really gives a damn.

A guy who didn't even commit a crime which involved physical contact with a child is completely reviled.

These crimes are different to any other.

dtd online sat reg went down for several years a few moths ago for similar.  It does feel quite weird knowing you have sat next to the guy numerous times.  I was shocked when someone told me and showed me a link to the news story on their ipad when i asked if anyone had seen him as i hadn't seen him in the sats and/or live at the club for a while.

Obviously a different thing, but with 1 in 4 women being victims of domestic violence and many from sexual assault, how many men who you sit alongside at the poker table beat their wives and girlfriends.  A frighteningly high number.

Don't know why the focus is always on women, the figure is not far from that for blokes also.

The figures are VERY different.  The 1 in 4 women and 1 in 6 for men doesn't include the frequency or severity of the violence.  A woman is killed every three days as a result of domestic violence.  How many men?  How many men are raped by their partners on a regular basis.

Did you know that on average women only contact the police after they have been assaulted over 30 times?

That's why the focus is on women being the victims, because a massive percentage of the time, they are.

Blokes still get forgotten about a lot of the time though, they deserve a fair shout too. You seem like an equal opportunities type of bloke, if the  issue is going to be raised I don't see why it can't be for blokes and women to be fair.

Of course domestic violence against anyone is a bad thing.  But the vast majority of those who are victims of domestic violence are women, and the vast majority of the perpetrators are men.  Here are some more stats:


-  2 women are killed every week in England and Wales by a current or former partner (Homicide Statistics, 1998) - 1 woman killed every 3 days

-  1 in 4 women experience domestic violence over their lifetimes and between 6-10% of women suffer domestic violence in a given year (Council of Europe, 2002)

-  Domestic violence has a higher rate of repeat victimisation than any other crime (Home Office, July 2002)

-  Every minute police in the UK receive a domestic assistance call – yet only 35% of domestic violence incidents are reported to the police (Stanko, 2000 & Home Office, 2002)

-  The 2001/02 British Crime Survey (BCS) found that there were an estimated 635,000 incidents of domestic violence in England and Wales. 81% of the victims were women and 19% were men. Domestic violence incidents also made up nearly 22% of all violent incidents reported by participants in the BCS (Home Office, July 2002)

-  On average, a woman is assaulted 35 times before her first call to the police (Jaffe, 1982)

The stats from the BCS massively understate the number of incidents of domestic violence as well. A woman who is beaten on a daily basis and eventually reports the crime is marked on the survey as one incident.

Also, like I said, many women are victims of rape and sexual assault from their partners.  Would you agree it's right to focus on women being the victims of rape?

Not really, what about gay rape on blokes too in the spirit of being inclusive?

Now you're just being silly.  We're talking about domestic violence and rape by partners - I'd be surprised if there's any significant amount of rape between gay partners.  With all your comments it does make you sound very much like a misogynist. Don't you think that women need/deserve the focus in this area to help protect them and prevent the vast majority of domestic abuse crimes?

I find the 1 in 4 ratio incredibly high.  What is the minimum classification of domestic violence?  I have been slapped around the face by previous gf's is that domestic violence?

1 in 4 women are subjected to domestic violence during their lifetime.  It understates the amount of domestic violence as I mentioned earlier, it doesn't address the frequency or severity.  It is incredibly high, disgustingly so.

2 women are killed through domestic abuse every week. That's a statistic where you can't really question the classification of the violence towards them.

I know it's a huge problem but if i was asked if i have suffered it would i say yes or no in a survey given i have been slapped around the face by an ex gf?

No, I think it's fair to give everyone a fair shout to raise awareness. First time I've known anyone be called a mysogynist for thinking both sexes should be treated fairly and equally.  Unless you are a misandrist?  8)

No, the focus should be more on women as a much higher percentage are the victims of domestic abuse.  Over a third of domestic violence starts when a woman is pregnant.  Next thing you'll be telling me it's the women's fault...

Think it has to be a current partner to qualify as domestic violence.  But if a girlfriend slapped you and caused injury then that would qualify as domestic violence, wouldn't it?

So you are discriminatory after all  ;djinn;

It was my current partner at the time i happened several times and i was living with her at the time and every time it happened behind closed doors in our house.  I wasn't injured.  Have i suffered domestic violence?

LOL at a privately-educated white male in a patriarchal society moaning about equal rights.  Misandry's a myth.  I'm done wasting my time indulging your misogyny.  Next you'll be complaining about being the victim of oppressive racism in the UK.

If you felt injured or threatened by it, then yes it was domestic violence.

This is a true story btw before redarmi comes in and tells me to man up etc!  I would say no i haven't suffered from domestic violence though if i was asked.

I'd probably have given you more than an open-hander if I was living with you Mark ;D

It occurred years ago when i was an 'arber' and told her i had done my bollocks that day!!!!!!  The 2nd time happened when i accused her of sleeping with Redarmi in Antigua!  I think i deserved the 2nd slap more than the first!

I apologise on my parents behalf for wanting the best for their children and paying for a good education for them.  ;topofclass;

Misandry's a myth lol I've heard it all now, at least we know you do discriminate after all  ;danafish;

kiboshi, i read closer to 45% of DV is against males..


watch this powerful video..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOyrYThlOag

men are way, way less likely to admit to it happening against them too.

This was sorta my point.  A lot of guys would never admit it like i have on here.  Also a lot of macho type guys wouldn't consider it domestic violence either even if they would admit it. 

How did you do your bollocks as an arber?

Betfair going down is the only thing I can possibly think.

It was a joke!  I had obviously punted it off but she thought i was an arber!  In all seriousness though even arbing i have had several days of getting drilled as an arber.  (late non runners for ew bets/ betfair going down etc etc)

Bit harsh to knock you around for losing some money.

If my Mrs did that, I'd be dead by now.

 :D

Whole story on accusing your ex of pumping Red Armi.

As for domestic abuse, any many that ever lifts his hand to a woman in a way to make fearful should have them cut off. 

Angry burds just need restrained.  Unless of course they turn out like that crazy one on Corrie. 

I find it difficult to have sympathy to woman and men that go back to violent partners to be hit time and again.   

It was a pissed up argument that got a bit out of hand by her.  She loved a drink even more than me and turned me into a semi alcoholic over the 5 years!

First bit simple.  Red armi told me numerous times he had!  He still does to this day!

You can't blame a girl for wanting a real punter rather than living with the embarrassment of being with an arber......

just lol at this 'noble' hunter guy, what a hero he is, scrounging about all day stirring up vigilantism

This has bothered me all night, as I find it hard to imagine ANYONE ever getting upset with you about ANYTHING, as you are so amenable & open to views of others. Can't say I ever recall you getting into an argument, either.

Lol.

I best move along.

Wtf is an arber?

It's where people park their boats

 ::)

Oh my, that is very good.

"arber" is short for "Arbitrage".

It's a form of betting, much frowned upon in some punting circles.

In short, an arber takes advantage of, or exploits, small differences in prices, & as such, can "lock up" or guarantee a profit irrespective of the result.

They are often referred to as dirty arbers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbitrage

It's a subject which generates much heat in the betting world.

Cheers Tikay  :)

Watched this last night with the missus, gotta say I was all for turning it off after the first minute, really didn't want to be listening to sordid messages and videos. However the missus said we should watch it, specifically as we have three young kids (all under seven), she felt it might help us understand the potential dangers towards kids from online predators.

First thing I got to point out and it may be being a bit naive here, but what websites are these that people join to be able to communicate to each other like that? Are they the run of the mill dating sites? Or some seedy sites that have to be thoroughly searched? I'm going to presume that it's not just under 18's as depicted in the programme that act in this way on these sites? Can anyone honestly come on here and admit to trying/experimenting with one of these over 18 only "adult chat rooms"?

I felt really uncomfortable with the whole programme and with Hunter's "angle" for doing it. It seems that after not directly answering the question about if he had been abused " no comment" was his answer, that his motives might be revenge for things that had happened to him or what he had witnessed as a young man.

Although we may not know the whole story it seems to me that an example of how Stinson might have provoked someone to do something that the wouldn't normally do is with The Guy that killed himself. I mean let's imagine that for a minute, a 46 year old man, who thought he was meeting an underage girl for sex, in fact comes face to face with 3 or 4 men who try to get him in a house, he instinctively takes flight and gets out of there and a few days later he kills himself leaving behind his own small child and no explanation to his ex wife. The guy went to the lengths of making the ultimate decision of ending his own life rather than facing up to what he had done or was going to do. Can anyone imagine doing something that made you feel so bad that the only option left is to commit suicide and leave behind what to me is the most precious thing in the world, your child.  Of course there will be two camps, those that say he put himself in that position and chose his own path and others that think he was lead into that position.

Whatever anyone thinks, as humans none of us are perfect and we can all make mistakes and certainly be lead by temptation towards something that we really shouldn't be doing, however when that temptation brings us into a world of sexual activity or grooming towards Children, for me a human instinct should kick in, it's not right and if you have chosen to take that path then you have to deal with the consequences, this guy thought it was better to take his own life, that was his choice, now his family, friends and child will have to live with the knowledge of not only what he was going to do but also with him choosing to take his own life because of it. A very sad situation for all involved.

What I thought was one of the most disturbing bits of information was when the ex copper said of the thousands of people he had contact with online when he was doing a similar role for the police only two people ever said that he was too young to talk too, maybe there is a place in the world for people like Stinson Hunter, be much better if they came in the realm of the police force rather than as a vigilante.

I wonder if Tim Berners-Lee knew that the internet could brings us this dark side along with the good side would he still have invented the WWW.

Slightly away from the original topic but still on the theme of justice and how it's handed out, does anyone else feel slightly uneasy about the two Burmese workers arrested for the murders of those poor students in Thailand?
The authorities have insisted that migrant workers must have committed the crime from the off, and seem more bothered about a quick result to preseve the island's tourist reputation than a thorough investigation.

I hope Mr Win and  Mr Saw get a decent impartial lawyer to look at these d.n.a results and check their supposed confessions, but doubt it.

Only uneasy? It's Very likely a fit up, they are done for now in the pursuit of 'saving face' for the Thai police, they have been incompetent from start to finish.

I wouldn't be in the least bit surprised it was one of the policemen who committed the crime either, that's how fucked up it is there!

The police in Thailand are very competent. They just choose not to be when they are paid enough money. Half of Thailand seem to believe they know who committed these murders and it isn't the two who have been fitted up.

Obviously a total disgrace but that's one of the risks of living here.

As a foreigner you have to be very very careful with certain things.

The just uneasy bit was from me having little knowledge about the case except for the few news bulletins I've caught and knowing nothing about how well the legal system is works there, so I didn't really want to make a snap judgement on their procedures, but it seems from your and Greekstein's comments my initial feelings about it all may be right.
Poor Win and Saw   :(