[NRA2BFree]

The only evidence in this article that the raped man was intending to meet a 12-year-old is the word of the convicted felon who raped him. The convicted rapist may have been hoping that this claim would make his own crime seem less heinous to the sentencing judge. It is dismaying to me that when certain subjects come up (child molestation being one) many FReepers get themselves all worked up into an indignant lather, and let rationality and healthy scepticism go out the window. Let's try to be smarter here folks!

It all came out in the police report at trial. The pedophile admitted that's why he was in the park at that time of the morning. He would have had sex with the girl had there been one. Btw, there were 2 homosexuals that raped the man.

[rogue yam]

It all came out in the police report at trial.

OK, that's possibly some new information, but my point still stands. The discussion on this thread concerned the information available on this thread. I never said the raped man was not a pedophile. Just that FReepers were jumping to conclusions based on suspect information in a way that I find typical for this site sometimes.