View Full Version : 'Dateline: To Catch a Predator' Case Ends in Acquittal
Teh One Who Knocks
08-17-2011, 02:10 PM
The Hollywood Reporter
http://i.imgur.com/hrHP0.jpg
A sailor caught in a child-sex sting aired as part of the Dateline: To Catch a Predator series has been acquitted of all charges, according to the San Jose Mercury News.
Sonoma County, Calif., Judge Arthur Wick on Tuesday threw out the case against Joseph Roisman, saying there was not enough evidence to move forward. The move came after six days of trial testimony.
Roisman had been charged with lewd and lascivious conduct with a minor after he allegedly arranged to meet up with a person he believed to be a 13-year-old girl in August 2006.
But it was part of a sting set up by anti-predator organization Perverted Justice and recorded by cameras from NBC's Dateline.
When Roisman showed up at a house in Petaluma, Calif., he was met by Dateline host Chris Hansen and cameras from the NBC show. Roisman, along with 28 other men, were later arrested.
Roisman's is the only case that went to trial; the other 28 men pleaded guilty.
In his ruling, Judge Wick criticized Dateline and Perverted Justice for their tactics, saying they lacked credibility and used entrapment.
"The axiom actions speak louder than words clearly does not apply in this case," Wick said.
After his arrest, Roisman was kicked out of the Navy and spent a year in jail.
"I'm ready to move on with my life," he said outside the courtroom. "Hopefully the service will take me back."
Roisman's attorney, Stephen Turer, had argued that client did not expect sex with a teenager when he showed up at the house in Petaluma, which was 110 miles away from his own home in Watsonville, and was planning only on "cuddling and watching movies."
But prosecutor Juliette Olson Assistant District Attorney Christine Cook said there was enough evidence against Roisman for a jury to make a decision.
Meanwhile, Roisman's mom, Deborah, said she plans to sue the show's producers.
"They made my son's life a living hell for five years," she said.
NBC has not responded to media requests for comment.
Hal-9000
08-17-2011, 02:18 PM
:facepalm:
He admits to the intent of meeting a 13 yr old ffs!!!
"...and was planning only on "cuddling and watching movies."
Ok...I'll find some 12 yr old girl and invite her over to watch Twilight.Check that, no I won't because I'm not a SICK FUCK
Godfather
08-17-2011, 04:18 PM
That's bullshit... now someone elses' kid is going to pay for the court's failings. Fuck that.
Meh. I have always had trouble with this entrapment anyway.
I wonder how many of the guys that pled guilty are doing this now...
:facepalm:
I wonder how many of the guys that pled guilty are doing this now...
:facepalm:
:lol: I know right!
Hal-9000
08-17-2011, 06:54 PM
Meh. I have always had trouble with this entrapment anyway.
Maybe a better disguise? :-s
PorkChopSandwiches
08-17-2011, 07:27 PM
Meh. I have always had trouble with this entrapment anyway.
I always thought it was kind of bullshit, except for the fact it was children. If this was anything else, like someone coming to buy drugs I would say its total bullshit. But, since its kids and they are well aware of it, I would rather have them bagged and tagged so they can get the full prison "experience" if they ever get caught again.
I always thought it was kind of bullshit, except for the fact it was children. If this was anything else, like someone coming to buy drugs I would say its total bullshit. But, since its kids and they are well aware of it, I would rather have them bagged and tagged so they can get the full prison "experience" if they ever get caught again.
I hear ya, but no child was solicited. How many actual children would invite these middle aged men to their houses? I'd say that number is negligible. So they are creating a situation that doesn't normally exist. They are stupid to try to take the "opportunity" but I'm not convinced they actually committed a crime. Intending to commit a crime is something entirely different and not likely illegal. Would they ever be in that position in their lives without that particular fake pretense? Quite possibly not.
Over 90% of molestations are from family members not random internet strangers - do something about that Chris.
My secondary issue is only targeting men.
PorkChopSandwiches
08-17-2011, 07:45 PM
I hear ya, but no child was solicited. How many actual children would invite these middle aged men to their houses? I'd say that number is negligible. So they are creating a situation that doesn't normally exist. They are stupid to try to take the "opportunity" but I'm not convinced they actually committed a crime. Intending to commit a crime is something entirely different and not likely illegal. Would they ever be in that position in their lives without that particular fake pretense? Quite possibly not.
Over 90% of molestations are from family members not random internet strangers - do something about that Chris.
My secondary issue is only targeting men.
I agree, I doubt in a normal situation the kids are baiting the adult the way they do in this show. Its much more believable that the adult has convinced the kids into meeting with him
JoeyB
08-17-2011, 09:40 PM
Ok...I'll find some 12 yr old girl and invite her over to watch Twilight.Check that, no I won't because I'm not a SICK FUCK
So...should I or should I not take off the schoolgirl outfit?
Meh. I have always had trouble with this entrapment anyway.
Me too. 'Justice' through any means possible strikes me as injustice, and amoral.
DemonGeminiX
08-17-2011, 10:43 PM
Intending to commit a crime is something entirely different and not likely illegal.
Nope.
Conspiracy to commit murder when no murder has occured, possession with the intent to distribute, et al. You can be arrested for making verbal threats without acting upon them. It's misdemeanor assault.
Anyone can be arrested and convicted for intent alone if it can be clearly shown that the alleged perpetrator intended to commit the crime.
There are tons of cases where people get snagged trying to hire an assassin when the supposed assassin is an undercover cop.
Hal-9000
08-17-2011, 10:46 PM
I hear ya, but no child was solicited. How many actual children would invite these middle aged men to their houses? I'd say that number is negligible. So they are creating a situation that doesn't normally exist. They are stupid to try to take the "opportunity" but I'm not convinced they actually committed a crime. Intending to commit a crime is something entirely different and not likely illegal. Would they ever be in that position in their lives without that particular fake pretense? Quite possibly not.
Over 90% of molestations are from family members not random internet strangers - do something about that Chris.
My secondary issue is only targeting men.
Well put dude :thumbsup:...but there are parts of the law that deal with intent.Everything from murder to drug dealing.
Why not intent to molest an underage child? They created a false environment yes...the other side of it is that they can create the situation and 19 of 20 people will walk away from it.Person number 20 however...
Southern Belle
08-17-2011, 10:47 PM
If he did it once, he'll do it again.
Hal-9000
08-17-2011, 10:48 PM
DGX you bastid :facepalm:
get outta mah head!
Nope.
Conspiracy to commit murder when no murder has occured, possession with the intent to distribute, et al. You can be arrested for making verbal threats without acting upon them. It's misdemeanor assault.
Anyone can be arrested and convicted for intent alone if it can be clearly shown that the alleged perpetrator intended to commit the crime.
There are tons of cases where people get snagged trying to hire an assassin when the supposed assassin is an undercover cop.
Well put dude :thumbsup:...but there are parts of the law that deal with intent.Everything from murder to drug dealing.
Why not intent to molest an underage child? They created a false environment yes...the other side of it is that they can create the situation and 19 of 20 people will walk away from it.Person number 20 however...
You may be right; but I don't see it in these cases. The crime is soliciting a minor for sex. That IS the intent crime not the actual crime. But no minor was solicited, so where's the crime? And in this case it doesn't sound like a sexual solicitation happened at all. If it did the defense wouldn't have been able to argue that he intended to cuddle and watch tv.
Hal-9000
08-17-2011, 11:15 PM
You may be right; but I don't see it in these cases. The crime is soliciting a minor for sex. That IS the intent crime not the actual crime. But no minor was solicited, so where's the crime? And in this case it doesn't sound like a sexual solicitation happened at all. If it did the defense wouldn't have been able to argue that he intended to cuddle and watch tv.
Yeah I get the sense that's exactly what he did...with some advice.
How about when a hot chick cop dresses like a hooker? The guy never gets to touch the goodies and the woman cop doesn't pocket the 100 bucks or whatever, yet the potential john gets charged and prosecuted.
DemonGeminiX
08-17-2011, 11:16 PM
You may be right; but I don't see it in these cases. The crime is soliciting a minor for sex. That IS the intent crime not the actual crime. But no minor was solicited, so where's the crime? And in this case it doesn't sound like a sexual solicitation happened at all. If it did the defense wouldn't have been able to argue that he intended to cuddle and watch tv.
They have printouts of communications that clearly show what the perpetrator is after. The fact that he shows up solidifies the case.
It's the same thing as arresting Johns soliciting an undercover officer posing as a prostitute. Nothing happened, there was no actual prostitute, but the intent was there. They always convict those people. To Catch A Predator is the same exact thing, just minor differences in details. If nothing else, they have a ton more evidence because of the digital communications and the taped interviews with Hansen.
Hal-9000
08-17-2011, 11:16 PM
I guess in my last example the guy has to state - What is anal for 100 bucks Alex...and then he gets popped due to the intent.
Hal-9000
08-17-2011, 11:17 PM
FFFFFFSSSSS DGX :x
:lol:
JoeyB
08-17-2011, 11:19 PM
I guess in my last example the guy has to state - What is anal for 100 bucks Alex...and then he gets popped due to the intent.
I'm confused, are you saying Alex Trebek is a sex fiend?
I still disagree. In the case of adult solicitation, it is illegal to solicit anyone for sex - meaning pay. In the child case, it's only illegal to try and get laid if it's with a minor. But there was no minor involved here. It's essentially a thought crime. The showing up part adds nothing to it as far as I can see.
Teh One Who Knocks
08-17-2011, 11:21 PM
They have printouts of communications that clearly show what the perpetrator is after. The fact that he shows up solidifies the case.
It's the same thing as arresting Johns soliciting an undercover officer posing as a prostitute. Nothing happened, there was no actual prostitute, but the intent was there. They always convict those people. To Catch A Predator is the same exact thing, just minor differences in details. If nothing else, they have a ton more evidence because of the digital communications and the taped interviews with Hansen.
If they had the transcripts on this guy, how did he get acquitted? ;)
Hal-9000
08-17-2011, 11:23 PM
I've been possessed by a demon, I must leave this thread :|
If they had the transcripts on this guy, how did he get acquitted? ;)
exactly, but even with them, I still say no crime was committed.
Teh One Who Knocks
08-17-2011, 11:23 PM
exactly, but even with them, I still say no crime was committed.
I'm on your side dude...going after thought crimes is a slippery slope.
Southern Belle
08-17-2011, 11:33 PM
Sad that a real child will be abused before he is punished.
Teh One Who Knocks
08-17-2011, 11:35 PM
Sad that a real child will be abused before he is punished.
Have you ever 'wished' someone was dead? If so, then you should turn yourself in for being guilty of a thought crime. It's the same thing.
Southern Belle
08-17-2011, 11:36 PM
Have you ever 'wished' someone was dead? If so, then you should turn yourself in for being guilty of a thought crime. It's the same thing.
I don't disagree with that at all. I know exactly what everybody is saying.
Who can KNOW intent?
DemonGeminiX
08-17-2011, 11:44 PM
I still disagree. In the case of adult solicitation, it is illegal to solicit anyone for sex - meaning pay. In the child case, it's only illegal to try and get laid if it's with a minor. But there was no minor involved here. It's essentially a thought crime. The showing up part adds nothing to it as far as I can see.
There was no prostitute involved either. There also was no money exchanged. By your reckoning, the adult solicitation should be a thought crime as well, which leads us back to the intent.
As far as I can remember, the perpetrators didn't just show up. They asked for the meeting with the explicit expectation of sex with a minor, they willfully agreed to a time and place... the only thing missing that's truly different from adult solicitation is money. But the laws on sexual exploitation of a child that are on the books don't mention money. It's a crime to just have sex with a minor. And the laws express that one can be arrested for the intent, as you can with most other crimes.
If the guy doesn't show up, it could be argued that he's just talking shit, he had no intention of following through. But if he does show up, he followed through. Sure, maybe during the course of the evening, he doesn't go through with it, but do you really want to wait to find out? Do you really want to wait to find out if the John is really going to pay the prostitute? Do you really wanna wait to find out if the dealer is actually going to sell the drugs? Do you really want to wait to find out if the alleged killer is actually going to kill?
I don't know why this guy got acquitted. As far as I'm concerned, it's a slam dunk case. I think that judge is insane. It's probably a backlash over the bad publicity that Hansen received recently.
There was no prostitute involved either. There also was no money exchanged. By your reckoning, the adult solicitation should be a thought crime as well, which leads us back to the intent.
As far as I can remember, the perpetrators didn't just show up. They asked for the meeting with the explicit expectation of sex with a minor, they willfully agreed to a time and place... the only thing missing that's truly different from adult solicitation is money. But the laws on sexual exploitation of a child that are on the books don't mention money. It's a crime to just have sex with a minor. And the laws express that one can be arrested for the intent, as you can with most other crimes.
If the guy doesn't show up, it could be argued that he's just talking shit, he had no intention of following through. But if he does show up, he followed through. Sure, maybe during the course of the evening, he doesn't go through with it, but do you really want to wait to find out? Do you really want to wait to find out if the John is really going to pay the prostitute? Do you really wanna wait to find out if the dealer is actually going to sell the drugs? Do you really want to wait to find out if the alleged killer is actually going to kill?
I don't know why this guy got acquitted. As far as I'm concerned, it's a slam dunk case. I think that judge is insane. It's probably a backlash over the bad publicity that Hansen received recently.
I am repeating myself here, but it's illegal to solicit to pay for sex. If you proposition a cop, you have solicited to pay for sex. It's illegal to solicit a minor for sex. If you solicit a cop you haven't solicited a minor.
The sting is different.
DemonGeminiX
08-18-2011, 12:00 AM
I am repeating myself here, but it's illegal to solicit to pay for sex. If you proposition a cop, you have solicited to pay for sex. It's illegal to solicit a minor for sex. If you solicit a cop you haven't solicited a minor.
The sting is different.
Well, we're going to have to agree to disagree then, because we're just gonna go round and round in circles.
As far as I'm concerned, when it comes to intent, there is no difference. The law on the books say you can't pay for sex, yet the exchange of money doesn't occur and neither does the sex, there is no real prostitute, yet you still get arrested. The law on the books says you can't have sex with a minor, you show up expecting it but there is no minor... bam! You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say and/or do can be used against you in a court of law....
Teh One Who Knocks
08-18-2011, 12:02 AM
http://i.imgur.com/GmbpQ.jpg
Well, we're going to have to agree to disagree then, because we're just gonna go round and round in circles.
As far as I'm concerned, when it comes to intent, there is no difference. The law on the books say you can't pay for sex, yet the exchange of money doesn't occur and neither does the sex, there is no real prostitute, yet you still get arrested. The law on the books says you can't have sex with a minor, you show up expecting it but there is no minor... bam! You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say and/or do can be used against you in a court of law....
You're just pissed you're losing in fantasy baseball this week. :P
DemonGeminiX
08-18-2011, 12:21 AM
Not yet. I'll be pissed on Monday when I have lost. As far as I'm concerned, I still have a chance to get back in it.
Even if I do lose this matchup, I've already won the series between us.
So :nana:
Hal-9000
08-18-2011, 01:00 AM
I'm with DGX on this one.If an online entity is faked and an adult arranges a meeting with a minor, it should be a crime.Even if the entity is the police and not a young child.
To me anyways...there's no reason for an adult to meet a child alone, as the result of online or phone contact.
Godfather
08-18-2011, 05:22 AM
I did feel bad for one guy on Dateline I remember seeing... he was 18 years old (they call him 'man' but I was 18 a few years back and still felt like a kid)
He solicited a 15-16 year old girl I seem to remember. When confronted, he started bawling and saying 'my life is over, my family is going to disown me, my uncles will never talk to me again.'
Big part of me just felt fuggin' awful for him. I think at that age, there's no way to know if he's a true pedophile who will do that kind of thing into his adulthood... or just a young guy who made a dumb mistake. :wha:
JoeyB
08-18-2011, 05:57 AM
I did feel bad for one guy on Dateline I remember seeing... he was 18 years old (they call him 'man' but I was 18 a few years back and still felt like a kid)
He solicited a 15-16 year old girl I seem to remember. When confronted, he started bawling and saying 'my life is over, my family is going to disown me, my uncles will never talk to me again.'
Big part of me just felt fuggin' awful for him. I think at that age, there's no way to know if he's a true pedophile who will do that kind of thing into his adulthood... or just a young guy who made a dumb mistake. :wha:
He's not. At fifteen and sixteen, you are dealing with fully grown bodies, fully grown appearances. He was not trying to nail a child, he's attracted to women. Also, lots of eighteen year olds freely mix with younger teens in high school. It's normal.
That guy got screwed by the predator show.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.