I actually read that piece in its entirety and came away with two distinct conclusions. Most of the cases were fairly run of the mill in the basic facts and were almost certainly guilty. But I was also left bothered by the fact that in most cases the cops never produced a shred of evidence that the suspects had gone online looking for sex with minors. In far too many cases it was pretty clear to me that no crime would have occurred if the state had not manufactured the conditions obviously intended to entice people into doing something that in most cases, the suspects would not have done on their own. Most of the suspects had no history of sexual predation or any evidence like online activity that would suggest inclinations towards that behavior. While I agree that almost all of them were ultimately guilty of breaking the law, the conduct of the government here looks and smells like entrapment.
Thought crimes
Entrapment is a great career builder for cops and feds, but it mostly snares introverted or inept or mentally ill people, not likely to take action on their own.
Goes for terrorism stings as well as sex atings.
Here is something else to consider. I just spoke with a woman who told me she was not allowed to access her 13 year old daughter’s medical records because, and I quote “She may be sexually active and she has the right to privacy in that regard.” Does anyone see a contradiction here? By law a 13 year old is not able to consent to sex. Which means this “right to privacy” is concealing a crime but hey that’s o.k.