Mother of 2 from VERY prominent Richmond family arrested by FBI for child p@rn, exploitation, etc

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The sex abuse cases that actually happen are boyfriends, friends, relatives. And they are not as reported because of association and because of retaliation. As the studies indicate the stings are actually taking money and time away from actual cases.

This sting targeting interest in “taboo parenting” is aimed at exactly those kinds of abusers.

Yes. And it allows a strong case to be built with electronic evidence that does not require a child victim's testimony.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People are studying whether stings actually help or not. This study below is due out June 2023.

Kathleen Hambrick, co-founder of Citizens Against Government Entrapment, said in an email that the group is trying to convince legislators in Washington State to change the focus of the state’s efforts to prevent online crimes against kids. In 2021, CAGE helped persuade lawmakers to do what the federal government has not: fund a study of whether fictitious victim stings done by the state’s ICAC task force—in an ongoing operation called “Net Nanny”—are effective in deterring or reducing crime. The study, which is due to be released next June, also is comparing the criminal histories of those arrested in stings with the histories of those arrested in traditional reactive investigations, an apparent effort to determine whether stings are misdirecting resources toward people who pose a low risk of actually offending.

CAGE also convinced the state’s Sex Offender Policy Board to recommend that the Legislature create sentencing alternatives for those convicted as a result of fictitious stings, though lawmakers haven’t yet acted on that recommendation, according to Hambrick. CAGE is also urging researchers to do more studies of the effectiveness of proactive stings.

https://theappeal.org/online-child-sex-stings-protect-act/

Are you Kathleen? This lady has an axe to grind because her son tried to pay for sex with a person who said they were 13 years old. The son then tried to say it was a 'fantasy'.

Give me a break.

[Anonymous]

I get what you all are saying about sting operations catching people on a website who may not engage in real life predatory behavior vs CSA victims who are being abused by the most likely culprits (family members, friends of family). However, in THIS case, against EHH, the sting operation caught someone (EHH) who actually has hurt kids. How do we know she’s hurt kids? Because she had and distributed images and videos of actual kids being abused. So she’s not a hypothetical abuser. She IS an abuser. And she was caught through a sting operation. They are not useless. They do catch real predators.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The sex abuse cases that actually happen are boyfriends, friends, relatives. And they are not as reported because of association and because of retaliation. As the studies indicate the stings are actually taking money and time away from actual cases.

Person who continues to talk about the cons of sting operations ...please go start a new thread

[Anonymous]

I was trying to imagine what it must be like for her ex and for her young kids right now, especially with Mother's Day coming up and the story having been picked up widely last week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was trying to imagine what it must be like for her ex and for her young kids right now, especially with Mother's Day coming up and the story having been picked up widely last week.

The Ex is remarried and has custody of the kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was trying to imagine what it must be like for her ex and for her young kids right now, especially with Mother's Day coming up and the story having been picked up widely last week.

The Ex is remarried and has custody of the kids.

Right, that has been discussed on the thread. I meant emotionally and in light of all of the recent publicity.

[Anonymous]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/researchers-discover-two-psychological-traits-that-connect-narcissism-to-sadism/

Eleanor seems to exhibit both traits.

[Anonymous]

Long story, but I was an observer in a sex offender treatment program. I met and heard the stories of many men some caught by these stings, some not caught but reached out for help.

The men that had been in the program long enough all admitted 100% that they needed to stop. All had attractions to young girls that stemmed from other issues they were fighting.

They were not victims, they themselves were glad to be in a program to try to change. Some had to come back multiple times, but were willing to continue to try to break the pattern.

Men are very unwilling to get help until they are compelled to do so. The stings are not the problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is a fetish website? Why aren’t these monitored for postings about children?

That’s exactly how she got caught…

But it was a sting operation. A kind of entrapment. Not monitoring actual details between two people without fake police involvement.

I don’t know what you’re talking about. They go to the sites where people like her go and find them on the message boards. What more do you want?

I think they should focus on the cases they have where people report and stop the sting operations. Now there are two children and a husband hurt by this plus her for a fake person and what exactly did she do? She was going to watch? It wasn’t even like she proposed the act. The police did. I mean it’s creepy but I don’t really understand the crime exactly. There are thousands of actual sex abuse cases that don’t get the attention they deserve. Where people call up and the police don’t have time for them or the judge rules that it was a lesser crime or no crime. Why are they making up cases rather than doubling down on the reported ones?

They aren't making up the case. The defendant has a guilty mind. Her documented understanding of the facts and her conduct fit the definition of crimes she is charged with. It's irrelevant that the facts that the defendant understood to be true, were false. Even a dog knows the difference between being tripped over versus being kicked. The dog would certainly have been kicked, if the facts were as the defendant believed them to be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The sex abuse cases that actually happen are boyfriends, friends, relatives. And they are not as reported because of association and because of retaliation. As the studies indicate the stings are actually taking money and time away from actual cases.

This sting targeting interest in “taboo parenting” is aimed at exactly those kinds of abusers.

Exactly. The criticism is aimed at those "To Catch a Predator" setups where they find some mentally-deficient 20yo guy who thinks he's going on a date with a 16yo. People like this woman, who have access to children, are the real priority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was trying to imagine what it must be like for her ex and for her young kids right now, especially with Mother's Day coming up and the story having been picked up widely last week.

The Ex is remarried and has custody of the kids.

Yes Divorced in 2021 and already remarried.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Long story, but I was an observer in a sex offender treatment program. I met and heard the stories of many men some caught by these stings, some not caught but reached out for help.

The men that had been in the program long enough all admitted 100% that they needed to stop. All had attractions to young girls that stemmed from other issues they were fighting.

They were not victims, they themselves were glad to be in a program to try to change. Some had to come back multiple times, but were willing to continue to try to break the pattern.

Men are very unwilling to get help until they are compelled to do so. The stings are not the problem.

This is so sad as disturbing at the same time. Was this an inpatient program? How much recidivism was there? I hope the ones who were willing to come back and try eventually succeeded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is a fetish website? Why aren’t these monitored for postings about children?

That’s exactly how she got caught…

But it was a sting operation. A kind of entrapment. Not monitoring actual details between two people without fake police involvement.

I don’t know what you’re talking about. They go to the sites where people like her go and find them on the message boards. What more do you want?

I think they should focus on the cases they have where people report and stop the sting operations. Now there are two children and a husband hurt by this plus her for a fake person and what exactly did she do? She was going to watch? It wasn’t even like she proposed the act. The police did. I mean it’s creepy but I don’t really understand the crime exactly. There are thousands of actual sex abuse cases that don’t get the attention they deserve. Where people call up and the police don’t have time for them or the judge rules that it was a lesser crime or no crime. Why are they making up cases rather than doubling down on the reported ones?

She absolutely did independently propose crimes. She also brought items to use in the criminal conduct she proposed. AND she possessed and shared sex abuse images.

+1 where did those images come from? She is already a criminal for having possession of them, or even worse, made those images. People are sick for defending her and condemning the sting when it could have saved other children from similar abuse.

I was simply saying that sting operations of all kinds don't deter crime. I don't know this particular crime and person. I just think they need to curtain their sting operations. If 85% of the people found don't have a record or are even found to be anything but low level danger to society even after arrest and conviction plus you are stinging at an 8:1 ratio of sting to actual crime, you have a bigger problem with the sting and its impact on society than the crime.

So first time offenders should be given a pass when it comes to crime statistics? Child abuse is a low-level danger?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is a fetish website? Why aren’t these monitored for postings about children?

That’s exactly how she got caught…

But it was a sting operation. A kind of entrapment. Not monitoring actual details between two people without fake police involvement.

I don’t know what you’re talking about. They go to the sites where people like her go and find them on the message boards. What more do you want?

I think they should focus on the cases they have where people report and stop the sting operations. Now there are two children and a husband hurt by this plus her for a fake person and what exactly did she do? She was going to watch? It wasn’t even like she proposed the act. The police did. I mean it’s creepy but I don’t really understand the crime exactly. There are thousands of actual sex abuse cases that don’t get the attention they deserve. Where people call up and the police don’t have time for them or the judge rules that it was a lesser crime or no crime. Why are they making up cases rather than doubling down on the reported ones?

She absolutely did independently propose crimes. She also brought items to use in the criminal conduct she proposed. AND she possessed and shared sex abuse images.

+1 where did those images come from? She is already a criminal for having possession of them, or even worse, made those images. People are sick for defending her and condemning the sting when it could have saved other children from similar abuse.

I was simply saying that sting operations of all kinds don't deter crime. I don't know this particular crime and person. I just think they need to curtain their sting operations. If 85% of the people found don't have a record or are even found to be anything but low level danger to society even after arrest and conviction plus you are stinging at an 8:1 ratio of sting to actual crime, you have a bigger problem with the sting and its impact on society than the crime.

So first time offenders should be given a pass when it comes to crime statistics? Child abuse is a low-level danger?

+1. I’m so tired of anonymous posters trying to excuse and normalize child sexual abuse under a cloak of anonymity on DCUM. We see you.

PS prison doesn’t deter crime either, does that mean no one should be in prison.