Misplaced Pages

Perverted-Justice

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by XavierVE (talk | contribs) at 11:13, 8 January 2005 (Reversion due to removal of proper external links/paragraph in pro). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 11:13, 8 January 2005 by XavierVE (talk | contribs) (Reversion due to removal of proper external links/paragraph in pro)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Perverted-Justice.com (also known as "PeeJ") is a website dedicated to catching Internet pedophiles while they attempt to meet up with underage children for sexual encounters. The website makes use of contributors who pose as young girls or boys, talk to older men who are interested in exchanging photos online, and then attempt to set up dates and times to meet. These contributors are actually usually grown men and women who bait such men into getting caught. Subsequently, they place information about these men on the website for anyone with Internet access to view.

History

The organization and web site were set up in 2002 by Xavier Von Erck, who, while roaming Portland, Oregon online chatrooms, had grown tired of males approaching younger, adolescent girls. Before August 2003, the web site was mostly dedicated to the Portland area. With the advent of national exposure, stemming from a link by Cruel.com, they refined their techniques in the area of phone verification and followup. As of 2004, 24 arrests have been made in the United States, along with a litany of convictions and indictments, thanks to the work of Perverted-Justice.com with police departments across the country. The website is also credited with the recovery of an abducted female in September of 2004.

Accomplishments

The website has obtained convictions in the following states: Arkansas, California, Maryland, Illinois, Michigan and Minnesota. They have current high profile on-going cases in New York, Ohio, Rhode Island, California, Louisiana, Connecticut and Minnesota. This compliments what site administrators say are many lower profile (non-Media) cases that most do not hear of until a conviction is entered. The website has been used as a sole basis for search warrants, including the use of a SWAT team in one known example. Site owners are quick to point out that large-scale police operations only were started in December of 2003 and took some time to obtain agreements with police departments and agencies across the country. The organization is currently the largest anti-pedophilia website online, with membership numbering in the thousands. It was profiled by Dateline NBC in an hour-long "Group Media Bust" which found nineteen individuals arriving for the cameras of NBC. A currently on-going federal case of a New York firefighter is still in progress from that show. According to Nielsen Family Research, the program alerted 8.4 million people to the dangers of online pedophilia, winning the timeslot in which it aired.

Culture

The forums are where the real action takes place. Once an exchange between a presumed sexual predator and a faux child is posted, thousands of interested parties use every means at their disposal to fully identify and expose the chat predator.

One controversial intra-community issue is the moderators' enforcement of Usenet-type etiquette on the forums. The people posting there are average people for the most part, not computer experts. If a post falls outside of the forum's rigid set of rules it will be moved, edited, or deleted. This is done to ensure that the forums run smoothly and without fighting or disputes.

Another issue involves the recent change in members' ability to access the private message system. As of October of 2004, only those with 30 posts can send or receive private messages. This was to stop people who have been identified as perverts from signing up for a account and sending unkind or disruptive private messages to forum users. Those who were using the private message system before but have less than 30 total posts cannot get to private messages that have been sent to them by members but continue to get notices e-mailed to them that they have messages waiting.

Some who wish to participate and help the cause are put off by these tactics and leave disappointed. Others feel that the rules and moderation create a more effective organization and believe in such tactics in the course of furthering the web site's cause.

The forums have also established a Survivor's area, for those who have been sexual abuse victims to share tips, information and caring with other former victims.

Controversy

Some critics have expressed concern or opposition in regard to Perverted-Justice.com, with the administration of the web sites illustrating that most critics are outside the United States, and labeling them as defenders of pedophiles. They shrug off most concerns regarding the site by stating that they would rather be defending American children from would-be pedophiles than doing nothing at all, along with pointing at their long track record of success with law enforcement and the recovery of an abducted girl in September of 2004.

Pros

Supporters of the site argue that viewers are given the opportunity to read chat logs of the online encounters with the men and decide for themselves on their intents. Also, the site mentions whether each alleged potential victimizer was contacted by phone or seen at the location agreed upon, largely confirming their true intentions. This removes the idea that someone will be able to "fake" being another person, as the phone number is one of the many means of identifying the actual participant in the chat-log. Additionally, the site allows men with information posted about them the "right of reply" in defense of or apologetic admission of their wrongdoings, and it will also occasionally — though very seldom — remove information on certain men after they show positive, compelling reasons for such removal, such as receiving psychological counseling. On the legal front, Jonathan Zittrain, of Harvard Law School, has claimed in interviews with the Boston Globe and Court TV that the site is completely legal. Additionally, the organization has won a thanks from the Department of Justice in the Ryan Hogan federal case and from other police around the country, most notably a effusive letter from the Port Huron Police Chief in Michigan.

The administrators of the website make clear that they:

  • Do not initiate the online contact with the men,
  • Do not accept tips from Internet users, to eliminate the chance that someone use the site for vengeful purposes, and
  • Make an attempt to contact law enforcement on every chat-log they do.
  • Established their "Information First" police program in December of 2003, which now covers 98 million Americans across the nation. Information First agreements are with specific police who would like the chat-logs delivered to law enforcement before anyone else for possible policework.
  • Have been credited with assisting in obtaining six convictions since June of 2004, and was able to locate an abducted girl in September of 2004.
  • Are active partners with ChildSeek Network, Counter Pedophilia Investigative Unit and PoliceWorld.net.

The website states that it is proud to be the only resource on the internet that shows parents the exact reality of what occurs in chat-rooms across the United States. Site supporters argue and believe that the uncensored information educates parents quickly to the dangers of the internet for their children. Additionally, the website is quick to point out that it uses Meta Tag technology to block the website on every effective piece of internet filtration software known to exist. Considering the hundreds of media pieces about the organization and efforts dedicated to fight online chat solicitation, site supporters tout that tens of millions of American families now have a better understanding of internet dangers.

Cons

At the heart of the protest of Perverted-Justice.com is a right to privacy issue — the fact that Perverted-Justice.com displays photos and lists names, addresses, telephone numbers, instant messenger usernames, email addresses, schools, and workplaces of the men that have been accused by the group of trying to seduce or lure teenagers through the Internet, while keeping its own contributors anonymous. Critics of the site believe that the opportunity for someone to be innocently accused of being an Internet predator is large, especially since an individual could use a computer, online account, or any of the items listed above not actually belonging to him or her. Critics often cite the lack of training in proper procedures of evidence could result in true predators being allowed to escape prosecution as a result of being contacted by the group before real law enforcement is involved.

The more well known critics of Perverted-Justice.com include Parry Aftab, Wiredsafety.org (formerly Cyberangels); Peter Carr of Chatmag.com; Julie Posey, and Lee Tien, Electronic Frontier Foundation. Many law enforcement agencies have also stated that, while they appreciate the mission of the web site, they do not agree with some of its vigilante practices. The site's supporters argue that such critics are simply not acquainted with the organization or that protecting children online is more important than protecting the civil rights of alleged pedophiles.

Some legal scholars raise questions of entrapment or illegal activity on the part of Perverted-Justice.com's contributors. However, the only legal record of action against Perverted-Justice.com was an attempt at a harassment restraining order against two of the site's contributors in Minnesota by the mother of a man named Thomas Cison who asked a female to model thongs for him. The judge found that because the alleged harassment originated from out of state, the Minnesota court did not have the power to enforce, not to mention that in his opinion there was no harassment, he threw the Harassment Restraining Order out, rejecting all claims. The site's supporters argue that critics are simply not acquainted with the organization or that protecting children online is more important than protecting the civil rights of alleged pedophiles.

Some critics contend that the site's methodology is flawed, citing its low success rate — six convictions versus over 800 "busts." Supporters point out that large-scale operations working with police are relatively new and that six convictions in seven months is a very good track record to have.

External links

Categories: