Married man,41 arranged sex date with girl,16 met on facebook and beat&robbed

sara1981

sara1981

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
7,870
Reaction score
71
Married man, 41, arranged sex date with girl, 16, he met on Facebook... but 'was beaten and robbed by her and her friends instead'
Married man, 41, arranged sex date with girl, 16, he met on Facebook... but was robbed by her and her friends instead | Mail Online

Indianapolis man's Facebook hookup with Noblesville teen actually setup for heist, says IMPD report
http://www.indystar.com/article/201...ille-teen-actually-setup-heist?nclick_check=1

articles says suspect should arrest!
 
Depending on his history and how bad he was beaten up. If this was his first time and he was beaten up real bad, then it should give him enough lesson. No sexual activity had occurred so, no point of arresting him. In other word "We the People" took care of it already.
 
LOL. He had to return home to tell his wife he was robbed.
 
Sex or no, a 41 years old who arrange to have sex with a minor should land him in deep trouble legally. Not to mention what wife may or may not have known.
 
why wasn't the man arrested and thrown in jail?

Glad he got robbed and beaten..serves him right!
 
In order to press that kind of charge, one MUST commit specific crime. He didn't have sex, so how can it apply in legal system? Legal system is pretty much black and white. All you have to say yes or no. Judge will ask if HE did had sex with minor Yes or no? If No, then the case don't have any merit. There is no such thing as "Maybe" in the court room.

However, he (Offender) could sue them for beating him out and stole from him easily.

dereksbicycles said:
Sex or no, a 41 years old who arrange to have sex with a minor should land him in deep trouble legally. Not to mention what wife may or may not have known.
Click to expand...
 
Won't happen, Yes means guilty, no means not guilty. it is how the legal system run. They run by the book at rate of 100%, no exceptions.

dereksbicycles said:
Sex or no, a 41 years old who arrange to have sex with a minor should land him in deep trouble legally. Not to mention what wife may or may not have known.
Click to expand...
 
diehardbiker said:
In order to press that kind of charge, one MUST commit specific crime. He didn't have sex, so how can it apply in legal system? Legal system is pretty much black and white. All you have to say yes or no. Judge will ask if HE did had sex with minor Yes or no? If No, then the case don't have any merit. There is no such thing as "Maybe" in the court room.

However, he (Offender) could sue them for beating him out and stole from him easily.
Click to expand...

If conversation was saved between the 2 parties via computer or cell phone, it would be seen that the 2 parties planned to get together for sex. Maybe they did not talk about sex over messenger so if no, then no charge. If he talked about sex with a girl, then that is like soliciting sex.
 
Cell phone? It will be tough to bring up in the court cause they will ask if you have consent to record and document from other party. If no consent, then case has no merit. It had happened in the past. The only time that court will honor is if one PUBLICITY discuss with other to entice then can use that. But if done in private, have to have authorization from court first. That is how US constitution applies on it. To prevent from frivolous charges, and possible revenge. Just think about it, anyone can make up stories easily and it happens all the time.

If you call whatever companies to do business with them, every time they answer what did they first said? "Your call is important to us, we will record this call for quality and blah blah blah" If you continue with that call, you technically give them consent for them to use it against you if you plan to sue them. But, you have to inform them that you are recording their conversation in order to use that in court if you wish to sue them.

That is how legal system works.

dereksbicycles said:
If conversation was saved between the 2 parties via computer or cell phone, it would be seen that the 2 parties planned to get together for sex. Maybe they did not talk about sex over messenger so if no, then no charge. If he talked about sex with a girl, then that is like soliciting sex.
Click to expand...
 
police should flush these evil men out doing this,the girl had right idea but bet law come down on his side....was asked difference between natual juctice and the law on another thread,this ideal example,he got what he desevered but law will be on his side
 
What I am saying is if you saved conversation with other caller, judge will ask you if you informed that caller that you have intention to record this call or message, and did Caller continue the call or message? The first question must be yes before judge will ask you that second question. If first question is no, then that recorded call can not be used in court as evidence.

I wish I can find the case where I recall a case where Social Security had saved the conversation without the reception's permission. SSA attorney had present all the conversation evidence but judge threw it all away because it was not accepted by the law. Judge have asked SSA, supposed you talked with hearing receptions, do you record all the calls? Do you ask them permission? The answer was no so these evidence ended up DOA.

Im no attorney, but I have seen cases happened like this few times. That is why privacy law exists to protect them. I know it sucks but it is the way it is.


dereksbicycles said:
If conversation was saved between the 2 parties via computer or cell phone, it would be seen that the 2 parties planned to get together for sex. Maybe they did not talk about sex over messenger so if no, then no charge. If he talked about sex with a girl, then that is like soliciting sex.
Click to expand...
 
diehardbiker said:
What I am saying is if you saved conversation with other caller, judge will ask you if you informed that caller that you have intention to record this call or message, and did Caller continue the call or message? The first question must be yes before judge will ask you that second question. If first question is no, then that recorded call can not be used in court as evidence.

I wish I can find the case where I recall a case where Social Security had saved the conversation without the reception's permission. SSA attorney had present all the conversation evidence but judge threw it all away because it was not accepted by the law. Judge have asked SSA, supposed you talked with hearing receptions, do you record all the calls? Do you ask them permission? The answer was no so these evidence ended up DOA.

Im no attorney, but I have seen cases happened like this few times. That is why privacy law exists to protect them. I know it sucks but it is the way it is.
Click to expand...

Nope, first of all, 16 years cannot consent to sex in Indiana. Secondly, if sex or attempted sex with a child under the age of 18 is considered an act of pedophilia. It's a felony in Indiana.

We had a guy with the exact same situation with a undercover cop who pretended to be 13. He's in prison serving 60 years.

Pedophiles on the other hand do not do well in prison. Generally most prisons have separate housings to protect high targets from the general population. But very few have old systems that don't offer the same protection, their chances of being killed by inmate(s) goes up.

That turd got what he deserved and you can bet there's a pretty darn good chance that a divorce is in the works. He pretty much ruined his life, his name is most likely gonna be on the sex offender registry list for life.

Sucks to be him......
 
Wirelessly posted

diehardbiker said:
In order to press that kind of charge, one MUST commit specific crime. He didn't have sex, so how can it apply in legal system? Legal system is pretty much black and white. All you have to say yes or no. Judge will ask if HE did had sex with minor Yes or no? If No, then the case don't have any merit. There is no such thing as "Maybe" in the court room.

However, he (Offender) could sue them for beating him out and stole from him easily.

dereksbicycles said:
Sex or no, a 41 years old who arrange to have sex with a minor should land him in deep trouble legally. Not to mention what wife may or may not have known.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

All they have to do is look at the emails and facebook. It is a crime to solicit a minor online and meet them with intentions of having sex. Cops set up stings like this all the time and the suspects are arrested even when sex did not actually happened.
 
Babyblue said:
Wirelessly posted



All they have to do is look at the emails and facebook. It is a crime to solicit a minor online and meet them with intentions of having sex. Cops set up stings like this all the time and the suspects are arrested even when sex did not actually happened.
Click to expand...

True that....we had and have many "stings" here in Duval and surrounding counties....just recently more than 25 men were jailed because of it....Sex doesn't have to happen...it's the "intent" to have sex with a minor....
 
The difference is cops didn't beat up the suspect when they get caught and robbed them, remember, either "We the people" or the cops. Since he was beaten up and robbed by "We the people" meaning the justice has already been served, I don't think it is right to double whammy on punishment. The suspect was already beaten and robbed, that is another crime and it actually cancelled the primary crime.

It would be whole different story if these people called cop and have them show up when creepy pedophile showed up. OR if cops actually beaten them up, then court will throw out the case.

Babyblue said:
Wirelessly posted



All they have to do is look at the emails and facebook. It is a crime to solicit a minor online and meet them with intentions of having sex. Cops set up stings like this all the time and the suspects are arrested even when sex did not actually happened.
Click to expand...
 
That specific crime has NOT even committed so consent was never needed in the first place. Problem is he was tricked in and got beaten up and robbed. That is serious crime too, if these jerks were smart enough to call cops and let them do the job then it will be whole different case.

yizuman said:
Nope, first of all, 16 years cannot consent to sex in Indiana. Secondly, if sex or attempted sex with a child under the age of 18 is considered an act of pedophilia. It's a felony in Indiana.

We had a guy with the exact same situation with a undercover cop who pretended to be 13. He's in prison serving 60 years.

Pedophiles on the other hand do not do well in prison. Generally most prisons have separate housings to protect high targets from the general population. But very few have old systems that don't offer the same protection, their chances of being killed by inmate(s) goes up.

That turd got what he deserved and you can bet there's a pretty darn good chance that a divorce is in the works. He pretty much ruined his life, his name is most likely gonna be on the sex offender registry list for life.

Sucks to be him......
Click to expand...
 
It's very obvious that the suspects planned it. I bet it's not the first time. It's very easy to fool horny men so that's why bad kids are doing it. It's called a teamwork. Horny men need to watch out.
 
Back
Top