Lolicon Grooms Undercover Cops


A lolicon has been sentenced to 17 years for attempting to seduce young girls online; however, he never succeeded in chatting to a real girl at all, instead chatting to a succession of undercover police officers.

The man, a resident of Indiana, hankered after young girls and so tried to arrange real life sexual encounters in likely sounding chat-rooms.

His first effort, in 2006, succeeded in striking up an incriminating conversation with “13-year-old girl” Amanda_13, actually an undercover police officer attempting to entrap any lolicon hapless enough to stumble into such a chatroom.

Soon he persuaded her to meet with him for sex, but when he showed up for the rendezvous he was instead greeted by a police snare.

Secret Service officers soon searched his computer, discovering chat logs of him talking to supposed minors, aged 13 and 15.

After convicting him, the secret service finally realised that “daisy13_Indiana” was in fact one of its own agents, prompting the lolicon’s defence to appeal on the grounds of entrapment.

The judges reviewing the appeal then recognised the name of the other girl he had been chatting with, “blonddt,” as being yet another undercover officer from an earlier investigation.

“To our surprise, the government was unaware until this panel told it at oral argument that the other screen name, blonddt, was also an officer from the Indiana operation.”

The courts upheld the conviction anyway, holding that the chat logs amply demonstrated he was hunting for loli sex.

His sentence of 17.5 years, along with a lifetime of state supervision, has been upheld.

He apparently never chatted with a real underage girl at all, perhaps demonstrating that such chat-rooms are now the exclusive haunts of lolicon and police alone.

Via Wired.

    Post Comment »
    Sort by: Date | Score
    Comment by Chainy
    18:16 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    Doesn't he know that the Internet is where men are men, women are men, and children are FBI agents!?

    Comment by Anonymous
    18:23 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    17 years? Murderers and rapists get less than that.

    God I hate the people in this country. Nothing but idiots with dogma.

    Young adults don't need protecting. They aren't stupid, just ignorant. We treat them stupid, and put them in a proverbial playpen so they don't hurt themselves, instead of helping them grow.

    That's the job of a parent. To give them knowledge. You can't stop biological urges, so you better instill them with the facts.

    Or would that make too much sense?

    Comment by Anonymous
    21:22 16/08/2009 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    Yet another case that proves what I have been telling people for years: this whole BS about pedosexuals is NOT about protecting children, but about enforcing the 'morality' of people on other people.

    It's simply time to LEGALIZE pedosexuality, bring it out into the open, repeal the 'child sexual abuse' and statutory rape laws, and simply tell children that if they don't want a sexual encounter with someone, tell them that you don't.
    If they don't listen.... yell, scream, rant and rave and get the attention of someone else, because THEN they are doing something wrong by trying to force you into a sexual encounter you don't want.

    Comment by Anonymous
    04:23 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    You are retarded. Pedophiles prey on children because they are gullible, and not because of love. If you love someone, you wouldn't mind waiting a few years for him/her to be more mentally mature. And those chat room predators clearly target their preys because of their age, not because their personalities or any other valuable qualities as a human being. They objectify their victims, and worse yet, as sexual objects like a blow-up doll. So don't try to defend them.

    Avatar of solace
    Comment by solace
    08:15 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    And you are misinformed. If women only existed for a few years and then automatically transformed into men by some unavoidable natural process, would you tell everyone who is attracted to women that if they really loved the woman, they'd have no problem waiting for them to transform into a man before expressing their love for them?

    Avatar of solace
    Comment by solace
    19:34 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    Anon, the point of my hypothetical (yes it was a hypothetical) was to try to give you a more familiar insight into the mind of somebody who is attracted to an age, by reframing the situation in terms of gender alone. I'm sorry that you seem to have missed that.

    The point is, if a person is preferentially attracted to a certain age, then asking them to withhold their advances on the "target" (unfortunate term) of their affections until after that age has passed is like me telling a heterosexual male that he's not allowed to hit on women. "Waiting until they grow up" is equivalent to "hitting on a guy instead of a girl". That's all I was trying to say. It's far from a perfect analogy, but I was trying to keep things simple.

    Regarding your other points, they do not relate in any relevant way to pedophiles, as you claim. You are talking about sexual predators, who are often opportunistic, who look for victims rather than partners (who they then objectify and abuse), and who are motivated by negative feelings such as anger and spite, instead of positive feelings like love. This has nothing to do with pedophiles.

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:07 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    The fact they're gullible, their reactions, emotions and faces; you cannot find any of that in most women nowadays.

    That's also what pedophiles love, which is completely understandable, and that is why they rape such lolis~

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:13 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Please cite an instance where a pedophile devoted himself to one victim only. Every case I have read about is either they got caught red-handed the first time or they leave behind a string of victims. There is no love involved, just lust.

    Avatar of Chen-04
    Comment by Chen-04
    06:12 07/07/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    >>. "Waiting until they grow up" is equivalent
    >> to "hitting on a guy instead of a girl".

    It's even easier to explain. It's like telling anyone they ain't allowed to fuck a woman under the age of 30. Or 80, or whatever age one personally regards as "too old". Pedophiles think 18 is too old. Simple as that.

    Also, sexual predators ain't necessarily pedophiles.

    Comment by Orio94
    14:13 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Actually I've heard that in a great percentage of these cases, the child already knows that adult, as a relative or baby-sitter or teacher, you get the point.....just saying :P

    Comment by Anonymous

    Please cite an instance where such phenomenon actually happens. And I am not misinformed. Pedophiles are opportunists.

    Comment by bluekino
    07:18 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    again, molesters prey on children not pedos get it right.

    Comment by AmericanOtaku83
    22:19 16/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Really? I think you should have a seat right over there.

    Comment by Anonymous
    11:14 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Right over there, on the "Group W" bench, with mother-rapers, father-rapers, and all kinda mean, nasty, ugly people...

    Comment by Anonymous
    23:50 16/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I second this. Though what age would be an appropriate replacement age? 12? 14?

    Comment by Anonymous
    14:00 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    Protip: all girls in chatrooms are either cops or trolls

    Comment by Anonymous
    21:23 16/08/2009 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    For some reason in the back of my mind I believe if he just went out, raped, then murdered the girl he'd probably somehow would have gotten off with a shorter sentence than he got for just attempting to meet with little girls. The police should do a punishment fitting of the crime. Rather than jail him for that long, jail him for 2 years and take away all rights to use internet for another 6 years.

    Comment by Anonymous
    18:12 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    This may have something to do with the back of your mind being fucking retarded.

    Comment by Anonymous
    17:52 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    You guys suck. There is nothing unnatural about wanting to have sex with someone that has gone through puberty.

    It is a parents responsibility to teach their children about predators and to just say no. It's called street smarts and common sense.

    Why not just give children over the government at birth, and cut out the middleman. I'm sure they'll look after them as fine soldiers.

    If every parent was responsible like they should be, there wouldn't be any young adult being manipulated into being taken advantage of.

    I like how it's not a crime to take advantage of a woman that is 18 with a one night stand, but anything else is wrong. What? She's 18 so she's magically intelligent and not naive? Fantastic.

    No one was raped. No girl was seduced. No crime took place. It's that simple.

    I swear we reward people for being stupid.

    What else can we make the government do for us so we can be lazy and further remove our rights of freedom, choice, and free will.

    Comment by Anonymous
    18:06 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    I must have missed how sex was harmful. If a parent tells their kids about predators, protection, and the joys and consequences of sex, they will understand. They won't take advances from strangers. They will use condoms if they decide to be sexually active.




    Comment by Amanda_13
    05:54 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    It wasn't me, I swear, I'm no cop...

    Avatar of dzodzu
    Comment by dzodzu
    Comment by Anonymous
    Avatar of tyciol
    Comment by tyciol
    07:41 11/04/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    This is kind of ridiculous, haven't murders received lighter sentences?

    Comment by Anonymous
    05:06 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    technically, he isn't doing anything wrong yet. Crime? there no crime done yet. Shall we caught people and punish for crime he not done yet like in 'minority report'? He isn't talking to a real underage girl too. (and why would underage girl on chat anyway? what's the parent doing?)

    anyway, entrapment is also wrong. If he fight back legally, he would have win the case.

    Comment by Anonymous

    So police should only act AFTER someone has been killed/badly injured according to your logic? This guy clearly has the intention to solicit a minor if the undercover cops didn't stop him on his track. And no, he would have not won the case.

    Comment by thanto_
    07:44 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    It wasn't entrapment. Entrapment is when the officer propositions the target or coerces the target into propositioning. Neither was the case, and it never is.

    Also, what happened to police as crime *prevention*? What's the point if all they do is punish people after the fact?

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:35 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    The police didn't pass the verdict, the judge did.

    Comment by Anonymous
    13:34 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Deathnote. Enough said.

    Comment by hALOTOO
    16:49 18/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    He should have said my cat did it and I'm here to retrieve my cat

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:45 14/03/2011 # ! Neutral (0)

    A cat is fine too.

    Comment by Anonymous
    22:50 18/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    So the pedobear was disguised as a lolicon... interesting

    Avatar of Unellmay
    Comment by Unellmay
    16:18 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Sounds exactly like that how to catch a predator show
    except you know
    not on tv

    Comment by Orio94
    14:23 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    This is why you should stick to 2D lolis.....

    Avatar of tony-kun
    Comment by tony-kun
    11:20 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    may be the intention of the guy was to go to teach the girl what she did is dangerous. May be he knew an amanda and was curious to see if it was her etc. That stupid justice, in which not even a girl was part of it, is ridiculous. Attempt to do a crime... they can not probe it, and what you tell in a chat to a 13 year old girl is just what you tell in a chat to a 13 year old girl.

    Comment by Anonymous

    Fail at reading and comprehension? This guy is a repeated offender. I don't think they would build a case against him on his first offend. Might get a citation, but definitely wouldn't have ended up in jail and get butthurt.

    Avatar of TeeHee
    Comment by TeeHee
    10:21 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I'm surprised that Wired used Pedobear. Nice.

    Comment by Anonymous
    11:55 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    why won't you take a seat right over there...

    Comment by Riiku
    21:53 16/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    It would be even more epic, if at the randezvous point a gay police officers showed up and raped him, THEN took him into custody. Everyone would believe that the victim lies to try and save himself.

    Comment by zeeohsix
    21:26 16/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    why do they keep trying? must be that obsessed then must go to jail. crazy how some highly respected people get caught.
    there was this one guy who would trick girls to send nude photos then blackmail them for sex.
    then i read a local story how a guy did the same thing except he posed as a girl, got a boy to send nude photos, then threatened blackmail him. "she" told him a guy was coming over to suck is dick.

    unrelated but funny:

    Comment by Anonymous
    21:08 16/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    internet is just wonderful. on the net all the men are men, all the women are men and all little girls are CIA agents.

    Comment by Razor Claw
    22:15 16/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    No shit, Sherlock.

    Comment by Anonymous
    23:14 16/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    The CIA doesn't set traps for pedos buddy, the FBI does.

    02:37 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    If it's the CIA who's set up the trap then the lolicons will be dead at their monitors.

    Comment by Anonymous
    22:09 16/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    17 years and he didn't even fuck anyone

    what a fool, if you're gonna go to prison for that length of time at least commit a real fucking crime

    Avatar of Member548
    Comment by Rob
    04:53 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Yeah. I've seen dudes douse a person with gasoline and light them on fire killing them get 17 years. WTF is wrong with this nation that horrific murders cause less of a reaction then a potential sex crime.

    Comment by Random Basher Fag
    22:17 16/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    He didn't fuck anyone, but he'll get @$$ fucked by everyone (in prison, LOL)

    02:39 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    poor 17yr old virgin

    Avatar of AQ
    Comment by Acile
    22:33 16/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Why is somehow Secret Service involve in this?

    Comment by RLich
    04:12 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Chris Hanson?

    Comment by MusicalNote
    21:06 16/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Don't go to irc for lolis... go to MMOs. I find them all the time, and I don't want anything to do with real lolis!

    Comment by MeidoNiac
    17:28 17/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    That guy is truly a noob, he should already be aware that usually most little girls in IRC (unless they're kids curious for pedosex) would try to play jailbait and say they're 20+yo women.

    Post Comment »


Recent News

Recent Galleries

Recent Comments