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.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
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.