You said -- "Despite how sleazy Foley was in making these kinds of communications, no one has yet to allege he laid a finger on anyone."
Pedophies on the Internet are convicted just for their communications, *wthout* laying a hand on any of their "victims" -- because many of their "victims" are older *adult male cops* and not 13-year olds or 17-year olds.
Those pedophiles are convicted *not* on the basis of the age of the person on the other side -- but on the basis of whom the pedophile *thought* he was communicating to.
Regards,
Star Traveler
Actually I just heard a report about this and the opposite is true. Judges are throwing cases out and convictions are being overturned on appeal, because even though the scum may have thought they were chatting with a 13 year old, if they were really communicating with an adult cop no criome has been committed. The story was about the Dateline stings in particular.
Not entirely true. I read an analysis that indicates this is a real legal gray area when there has been no attempt to meet with the person being communicated with. In those instances, there is almost never any prosecutable crime. The e-mails or communications act as evidence to prove intent when a meeting occurs, not as a prosecutable crime in and of itself. The law is different when such communications occur with a child under 16 in which case attempt to disseminate obscene material to a minor laws kick in. But at 16 and above such laws no longer apply when they're in the form merely of communication, or at least it has been deemed not to apply.
That's not to say Foley isn't sleazy and that it's not good he's resigned. Just stating the law as I understand it.