Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Accused Molester Hunted On Xbox Live

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the please-keep-the-lawsuits-to-a-minimum dept.

XBox (Games) 112

GamePolitics has the unfortunate task of reporting that an accused child molester evidently found his victim via Xbox Live. From the piece: "Watts made contact with the boy on Xbox Live in October or November. Their contacts ultimately included e-mails and pornographic videos sent by Watts. The boy eventually gave the suspect his contact information, leading to a meeting in a Santa Rosa park where the alleged molestation took place. After learning of the complaint, investigators searched Watts' home, seizing his Xbox and a laptop PC, along with a variety of cameras. Watts is currently free on bail."

cancel ×

112 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

At least... (3, Funny)

Pig Hogger (10379) | more than 8 years ago | (#14400630)

Well, at least, it's not the fault of the Internet...

Re:At least... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14401231)

Because XBox Live doesn't use the internet... It uses, uh... wait a second!

So what's his gamertag? (1)

jkeegan (35099) | more than 8 years ago | (#14400635)

Someone should figure out his gamertag and post it here, so that if the bastard is allowed to play xbox live while waiting for his court date, kids can steer clear, and everyone else can gang up on the guy and keep rockets firing at his head 24x7.

Re:So what's his gamertag? (1)

brontus3927 (865730) | more than 8 years ago | (#14400882)

From TFA: After learning of the complaint, investigators searched Watts' home, seizing his Xbox and a laptop PC, along with a variety of cameras

Tough to play your xbox when you don't have it.

Re:So what's his gamertag? (0)

voice_of_all_reason (926702) | more than 8 years ago | (#14400994)

After learning of the complaint, investigators searched Watts' home

Whoa, there, Barney Fife. Aren't we forgetting a step, like obtaining a warrant first?

Re:So what's his gamertag? (1)

SetupWeasel (54062) | more than 8 years ago | (#14401022)

The President doesn't need one.

Re:So what's his gamertag? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14401347)

After all, only un-American terrorists would object to that.

Re:So what's his gamertag? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14401387)

I hope someone punches you in the dick today.

Re:So what's his gamertag? (2, Insightful)

Delphiki (646425) | more than 8 years ago | (#14402038)

I find your user name very amusing when viewed in light of your paranoia. If I said "After I turned into my drive-way, I got out of my car." would you jump to the conclusion that I did not stop the car, put it in park, and take the keys out of the ignition? Because I can do all those things in between, and still have the statement be completely true. Just like the police can get a warrant after learning of the complaint, but before searching the home, and the statement you quoted is still valid.

Re:So what's his gamertag? (1)

Aranth Brainfire (905606) | more than 8 years ago | (#14403251)

"...keep rockets firing at his head 24x7."

Feet. You fire rockets at the feet, so if you miss, it still hurts. Duh.

Re:So what's his gamertag? (1)

bckrispi (725257) | more than 8 years ago | (#14405781)

I'm pretty sure that as a condition of his bail he was given the standard conditions of "stay away from kids, stay off the Internet, etc."

Re:So what's his gamertag? (1)

MikeFM (12491) | more than 8 years ago | (#14407327)

If the kid got home made porno from the guy and still went to see him either the kid was dumb as dirt or was looking for what was offered. The guy should get some minor punishment (Being a frag target should be good enough.) for messing around with a minor but that should be enough. A 14 year old should be old enough to understand sexual concepts and know if they want to respond or not. Probably the parents should ground the kid from playing XBox for a while and learn to pay a bit more attention to what their kid is up to.

Where is... (1)

Bin_jammin (684517) | more than 8 years ago | (#14400640)

Jack Thompson when you need him? Can a new crusade be far off?

But... (1)

Channard (693317) | more than 8 years ago | (#14400673)

.. has the guy's Live account been cancelled? If not, that'd be a story in itself.

Re:But... (1)

oahazmatt (868057) | more than 8 years ago | (#14400771)

Perhaps the account should not be cancelled, but it would be interesting to see a flag system in place. After all, neighbors are notified when a sexual predator moves into town. Perhaps Microsoft should consider branding convicted offenders with specific icons so that they can still sign onto the network while alerting anyone to their criminal status.

Re:But... (1)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 8 years ago | (#14402830)

That leads to all sorts of amusing mental images of what such warning icons might look like. And how they could be abused.

Cue Mr. Show Reference... (1)

pswayze (893054) | more than 8 years ago | (#14403542)

RAPIST HERE! You're playing games WITH A RAPIST.

Re:But... (1)

voice_of_all_reason (926702) | more than 8 years ago | (#14400825)

Problem: he hasn't been convicted yet. Of course, private enterprises are allowed to discriminate against customers in this country (as long as it's not based on religion, sex, race, or handicap), but it's still not a good thing.

Let's take a slide down the slippery slope! What if Nintendo decided smokers couldn't play Mario Kart online because it was against their image as a child-friendly system? Don't think it can't happen -- employers are already doing this.

Re:But... (1)

iotashan (761097) | more than 8 years ago | (#14401264)

That's not exactly the same comparison. Employers might not allow employees to smoke at work. That would be like Nintendo not allowing you to smoke while your GameCube was turned on.

Re:But... (1)

magicchex (898936) | more than 8 years ago | (#14401348)

Actually, it is the same comparison.

There are companies now that test potential employees to see if they are smokers and refuse to hire them if they are.

Example [workrights.org] , Example 2 [washingtonpost.com] , Example 3 [dw-world.de] .

Re:But... (1)

silverkniveshotmail. (713965) | more than 8 years ago | (#14407539)

Ignoring the fact that the gamecube is your property and you own it, while your job... well, isn't tangible, and you don't own the company. (at least, not if you're being fired for smoking you don't)

Re:But... (1)

HTL2001 (836298) | more than 8 years ago | (#14402150)

Slide down a slippery slope? its called banning, and all online games do it for violating ToS, and now all of them (that I've seen) include using the service to transmit or do illegal things, for example arrange drug sales, over the service. The company does their own investigation, and bans based on this. I wouldn't be surprized if they just banned based on this arrest (enough evidence to get you arrested is probably more than enough to get you banned)

Re:But... (1)

voice_of_all_reason (926702) | more than 8 years ago | (#14402401)

See, that's what confuses me. What happened to the unrelenting lust for profit that presides over all other aspects of business?

Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #57 - Customers are as rare as latinum -- treasure them

Re:But... (1)

Luigi30 (656867) | more than 8 years ago | (#14403000)

Well he can't pay for Xbox Live while in jail, can he?

Rule of Acquisition #125: You can't make a deal if you're dead. (Or in this case, jail.)

Re:But... (1)

silverkniveshotmail. (713965) | more than 8 years ago | (#14407548)

Well he can't pay for Xbox Live while in jail, can he? Rule of Acquisition #125: You can't make a deal if you're dead. (Or in this case, jail.)

What do you have against reading the summary? I understand no one reads the articles... but not even the summary?

Re:But... (1)

HTL2001 (836298) | more than 8 years ago | (#14403260)

Banning probably makes them more money... besides most misbehavior bans are temporary and try to just enforce a good community environment, perm bans result in new subscriptions (think bot farms, or people who still want to play etc.)

Jack Thompson (3, Funny)

Morinaga (857587) | more than 8 years ago | (#14400686)

This is certainly a rallying cry for Mr. Thompson to crusade against digital photography and parks in Santa Rosa.

As I was telling my friend... (5, Interesting)

oahazmatt (868057) | more than 8 years ago | (#14400688)

...This is a very good example of why I find the Nintendo WFC to be very well designed in terms of child safety. There are no WFC chat programs (currently) available, and the only way to seek a friend through Mario Kart or Animal Crossing is to already have their ID# (and vice-versa). I specifically stated possible sexual predators seeking out children to my friend when he was complaining of the lack of free chat and messaging services.

But nor do I blame XBox live. Ultimately the fault and blame is on the assailant. I simply think Nintendo was wise to structure such a limited network, especially with games targeted at younger audiences.

Re:As I was telling my friend... (2, Interesting)

Dark Paladin (116525) | more than 8 years ago | (#14400782)

I agree. I was mentioning the same thing to my wife the other day, how I would let my daughter play the Mario Kart on line. Animal Crossing at least means she has to "know" the other person first - which I can still monitor at a young age.

I'm curious to see if something similar happens on the upcoming Pokemon DS games. Matches can easily be done without exchanging a word - you find an opponent (either random or you enter their 16 digit code a la "Animal Crossing" for someone you know). But you don't have to do any speaking. A simple message of "This opponent wants to fight you!", or "this person wants to trade pokemon".

You don't even have to know the names of their pokemon - just "player sent out an oddish" and using the generic names prevents people from "player sends out penisbreath" or something inane. All that remains is a simple filter to keep out bad player names, and it will be pretty kid friendly and still entertaining. If you need to speak "out of bounds", you're welcome to use email/IM/real world chat.

As cool as Xbox live? Probably not - but as a guy with three little ones, certainly something I could trust.

Re:As I was telling my friend... (1)

voice_of_all_reason (926702) | more than 8 years ago | (#14401285)

You should bring an invisibility cloak to your child's school and see what she's really exposed to at that venerable institution. Betcha it'd be alot more appaling to you than "penisbreath."

Re:As I was telling my friend... (1)

Blackneto (516458) | more than 8 years ago | (#14401414)

It's all about the devil you know.
If you have kids you control what you can with the idea that you are doing it for their own good.
These controls are based on your personal beliefs, fears and prejudices.

Some people go overboard, some people don't do enough.

If you go to the kitchen of your favorite restaraunt you may be appalled by the conditions there and decide to never go back.

If a person did this with everything in their lives they wouldn't have a life.

Re:As I was telling my friend... (1)

voice_of_all_reason (926702) | more than 8 years ago | (#14401530)

Restricting your child's opportunity to have fun arbitrarily to satisfy your own desire to "do something, anything!" is not good parenting.

When she grows up and realizes her daddy prevented her from playing Mario Kart for an asinine reason, what do you reckon she'll think of the real, important rules you set down? Like "no drugs" and "no getting pregnant?"

Re:As I was telling my friend... (1)

Blackneto (516458) | more than 8 years ago | (#14402012)

Um yeah
I don't think the OP or I was talking about setting arbitrary limits.
I have no clue how you read my stance as a desire to "do something, anything".
These limits are set based on things i described above. Nothing wrong with setting guidelines.
There is something wrong with not guiding a child (either for good or bad)

Hopefully when the kid grows up you have trained them to decide if a limiting decision a parent has mad was asinine or not. If they can't determine it you've failed.

Re:As I was telling my friend... (5, Insightful)

Dark Paladin (116525) | more than 8 years ago | (#14401788)

Actually, already been there.

And this is a discussion that I've had with my sister in law. The idea isn't to keep her from seeing anything. I know she hears worse at school. She can see things already, and the goal is twofold:

1. To explain what it is so she doesn't get wrong ideas. (For example, if she asks me about gay people getting married, it's not "OMG! THEY'RE GOING TO HELL!", nor is it "Oh, well, you'll find out later." It's a discussion about what it means, why they do it, why some people don't like it, ect.)

At a young age, it's my job as a father to make sure the information sources she runs into as a 6 year old are controlled, so that people don't go "Hey, little girl - getting naked with a 40 year old man is fun!" For now, she knows that strangers can be bad for her, as she grows up and becomes more discerning through meeting people she'll gain her own ability to gauge for herself. How will she know what's "good" and "bad" for her, then? Which leads us to #2.

2. Let her know what her father expects standards of behavior to be.

Right now, my daughter knows that outfits that show off her belly are not allowed, neither are spagetti strings, anything that shows her chest, or skirts that go too high. (And before some dumb ass pipes in, no, we're not talking victorian age clothing. We're talking about T-shirts and jeans and normal skirts, while keeping my daughter from looking like a kinderslut.) She knows that certain words are not to be used unless she wants to get in trouble, and that we don't call people (even her little brother) names. And the younger is learning the same lessons (though at 3, he's still too young for some things.)

My sister in law told me that my daughter, when she becomes a teenager, will probably change into clothes I won't find appropriate and swear and who knows what. I know. I expect it. But - she will know what I expect of her, and she will know that I know she knows.

So when she's a teenager, she probably won't go "Oh, that mean Daddy wouldn't let me play Mario Kart with that guy I met on the Internet with I was six." She probably won't care. But she will know the kinds of people that her father wanted her to associate with, and will know what his standards of her friends are (aka - do they do drugs, are they child molesters, etc). At that point, if she wants to be stupid, there's little I can do.

But she will know the difference. If she learns bad words at school or pictures, she knows these are things that her parents don't find "good". Later, when she can judge for herself, she can learn that subtle difference between "art" and "smut", and decide what she wants.

Hope that clears it up a bit. Because I don't need an invisibility cloak to know what happens at my daughter's school. I just need to let her know what's appropriate.

+5 Good Parenting (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Custard (587661) | more than 8 years ago | (#14401906)

+5 Good Parenting :) The best you can do is influence them at a young age to be good critical thinkers, and then let them go into the world on their own. They may need a push in the right direction once in a while, but hopefully you gave them a good set of tools to use.

Re:As I was telling my friend... (1, Insightful)

voice_of_all_reason (926702) | more than 8 years ago | (#14401925)

At that point, if she wants to be stupid, there's little I can do.

You never mentioned telling her why your rules are in place -- which I consider even more important than ensuring they are followed.

"Don't call your little brother names because it makes him feel bad."
"Don't wear revealing clothes because people (men) will treat you like an object"
"Don't start drugs because you will have less money and might die."

Teaching children why to make decisions instead of just making them is like teaching a man to fish instead of just giving him one.

Re:As I was telling my friend... (1)

Dark Paladin (116525) | more than 8 years ago | (#14401968)

That was implied. I just didn't tell *you* because I didn't want to go on for 40 pages about child care according to John Hummel.

I mean - duh.

Re:As I was telling my friend... (1)

Blackneto (516458) | more than 8 years ago | (#14402054)

some people because of poor upbringing need to have everything spelled out for them.
They cannot infer from context or the flow of the conversation that somethings are just given. /snarky

Re:As I was telling my friend... (0, Flamebait)

M.C. Hampster (541262) | more than 8 years ago | (#14402283)

10 to 1 the guy isn't a parent. Just ignore him.

Re:As I was telling my friend... (1)

JohnFluxx (413620) | more than 8 years ago | (#14402849)

As a 24 year old male student, I often see young girls teenage girls wearing clothing that I can only describe as slutty. While I do enjoy looking when I know they are within the legal age (and even more fun, teasing my gf about it), I don't know what to think when they are younger, even more so when I'm not even sure if they _are_ teenagers :/

I do wonder about the motivation. I know that from 13 or so girls do become sexually aware (or whatever the term is for when their bodies are ready), so is that reason? Or is it just to copy their favourite singer? Or do they want to tease older men (and in turn enjoy the attention?) Or is it rebelling against the parents?

Re:As I was telling my friend... (1)

Dark Paladin (116525) | more than 8 years ago | (#14402931)

From watching my daughter and her friends, I think they just want to wear the grown up clothing. And when you watch the cartoons, like "Totally Spies", which for the most part is all right save the belly baring outfits, and "Winx Club" which has the girls looking like their about to ask for $50 for "services", it's hard to tell your 6 year old daughter it's just not right.

Odds are, most of the animators/etc who draw teenage heroines in shows don't think about that. They look at the styles and put them in since they're cool. (Now, "W.I.T.C.H." is a good one - I like the story, the girls are strong, and save the "going magical while naked" thing they got from "Sailor Moon", I have little complaint on the clothes. Most of the time.)

You're a very respectable parent... (1)

steveo777 (183629) | more than 8 years ago | (#14404043)

... for a dark paladin.

You may save your kids, but you're gonna burrrrnnn...

In all seriousness, I cheer you on, sir.

Re:As I was telling my friend... (1)

supabeast! (84658) | more than 8 years ago | (#14401926)

Nintendo's decision isn't just good for kids - it's also good for adults as well. I wish Microsoft had similar options for Live, so I could play popular games without the endless stream of racist and homophobic perjoratives spewed out by the players.

Re:As I was telling my friend... (2, Informative)

Saige (53303) | more than 8 years ago | (#14402205)

I believe there's an option to turn off voice output entirely.

If not, you can always direct it to your headset, then not wear the headset. Presto, no having to listen to people!

BTW, make sure to use the feedback system - it actually does make a difference. You'd be surprised how many people get voice banned for some period of time for their behavior - it's quite opposite from the impression people get that there are no consequences to getting negative feedback.

Re:As I was telling my friend... (1)

just_another_sean (919159) | more than 8 years ago | (#14402228)

Ultimately the fault and blame is on the assailant.

I agree whole heartedly although, as a parent, I would add that part of the blame rests on the parents for letting it get that far in the first place. My daughter has access to two compters in our house, one in plain site in our living room where if she is using it my wife or I are watching and one in her room that is *not* capable of connecting to the internet.

Re:As I was telling my friend... (1)

oahazmatt (868057) | more than 8 years ago | (#14402561)

The reason I do not place blame squarely on the parent is that some (not all, some) are still amazed, bewildered and uninformed as to what online video games involve. Do not misunderstand me that there should have been a watchful eye. However if the parent had believed it was simply a game and did not know the amount of communication possible, I would give them some slack. Some parents still do not comprehend what a "nintendo" is capable of these days, and frankly, they probably feel horrible about not monitoring the child after the fact.

Re:As I was telling my friend... (1)

PhotoBoy (684898) | more than 8 years ago | (#14402868)

Very true, the worst I've encountered on the Nintendo WFC service are crudely drawn hairy erect penises used as people's logos on their karts and people sending dirty letters to their animals in Animal Crossing. I'm not surprised some of the animals decided to escape to my village...

Re:As I was telling my friend... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14405714)

they traded email and porn videos, THEN he gave his address out.
I think the common sense teacher didnt do their job properly,

Nintendo (3, Insightful)

FriedTurkey (761642) | more than 8 years ago | (#14400749)

I think Nintendo has the right idea of not allowing open chat on the DS Wi-Fi. The worse someone can do is repeatitily slam thier kart into someone. I think chat is more annoying in a lot of games than helpful. BF2 has the canned voice chat thing down that voice isn't really needed. Counterstrike seems to have less annoying kids on it these days but for a while Counterstrike really sucked because of screamers. (Thank you X-box live). Even playinng PS2 Madden online can suck sometimes because I have to wait 30 seconds for some tool to accuse me of cheating? (No, I am not cheating, there are no cheats, you just suck.) I can see you need it on MMORPG but I don't play those. Get rid of all chat/voice in games and I won't miss it one bit.

nucking futz (1)

voice_of_all_reason (926702) | more than 8 years ago | (#14400778)


Just like in the rat-hat from Seinfeld, this just isn't good for anybody :(

Re:nucking futz (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14401076)

Or as Jackie Chiles would say: It's Outrageous, Hellacious, Salacious!

I'm sure the Soup Nazi would tell this guy: No soup for you!

o_O (4, Insightful)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 8 years ago | (#14400858)

I wouldn't have thought the x-box was the easiest way to pick up little kids. I doesn't have text chat after all and with voice communication it should be a lot harder to disguise youreselve. Bit hard to pretend your HotLisa16F when your voice only comes in over the subwoofer.

Then again this kid doesn't sound like he is a major loss to the gene pool. Meeting a total stranger in a park after exchanging porn. Oh yeah. That is something nobody has ever warned kids about.

I suppose I should feel sorry to sound nice but frankly I hate stupid people. Perhaps it is harder then when I was a kid but geez, has never ever had a talk with this kid before? Do not accept candy from strangers? Oh well, cue new laws designed to dumb down the world because of one pervert and a dumb kid.

Please mod above as TROLL (1)

Tetrad_of_doom (750972) | more than 8 years ago | (#14401754)

Then again this kid doesn't sound like he is a major loss to the gene pool. Meeting a total stranger in a park after exchanging porn. Oh yeah. That is something nobody has ever warned kids about.

It is obvious that you posted this only to incite anger in the rational members of the slashdot community. The fact that your post was modded insightful is evidence that few actually read comments before rating them.

In case you were serious: Kids are naive. They're KIDS. They don't always heed warnings by others. They don't always listen. That doesn't mean they don't deserve to be in the gene pool. That doesn't mean when they are abused it isn't a "loss". People who post comments in support of pedophilia are the ones who shouldn't be in the gene pool.

Re:Please mod above as TROLL (1)

Kazzahdrane (882423) | more than 8 years ago | (#14402173)

Oh grow up. The parent had a valid point, and was certainly not posting in support of pedophilia. Frankly if I had kids and one of mine did something stupid like that I'd feel ashamed at not having taught them better, or teaching them that some warnings kids are given are VERY serious.

This one obviously thought "Don't meet with strangers" was as important as "don't leave your videogame cartridge on a windowsill or other place where it will get direct sunlight".

Oh, and I think pedophiles are weird sickos who should be locked up. It's clearly the guy's fault, like you said kids are niave and still learning but COME ON, what a dumb/arrogant kid.

Re:Please mod above as TROLL (1)

Tetrad_of_doom (750972) | more than 8 years ago | (#14402824)

The original post has a valid point, inasmuch as defense attorneys always state that rape victims were "asking for it". It is an odious arguement, and that is why I called it trolling.

Re:Please mod above as TROLL (1)

snuf23 (182335) | more than 8 years ago | (#14403149)

Yes that is a bad argument and yes any type of abuse is tragic BUT acting stupidly can and often times will get you into trouble.
If you decide to visit the tigers up close in the zoo cage you may just get bit or eaten. They are predators. So is the pedophile sending porn to a kid he found on the Internet. Play with predators and you just might get bit.

Re:Please mod above as TROLL (1)

Saint Jimmy (943036) | more than 8 years ago | (#14403926)

Oh come on. That's a totally illogical comparison. This is more like a girl going out on a date to a seculded area with a well-known rapist. In the aforementioned case, I would say yes, she asked for it. In a similiar vein, this boy was asking for it.

Re:Please mod above as TROLL (1)

Suddenly_Dead (656421) | more than 8 years ago | (#14403701)

Santa Rosa police arrested Watts on Dec. 15 after the 14-year-old boy revealed details of the alleged relationship to his mother.

I don't remember being such a dumbass at 14. I remember logging into an online chat room once just to laugh at all of the people pm'ing me about "cybersex" and such shit. I can't comprehend how anyone could actually go along with anything like that and expect the outcome to be positive, just as I can't comprehend what the pedophile himself was thinking.

Re:Please mod above as TROLL (2, Interesting)

hoggoth (414195) | more than 8 years ago | (#14404398)

> I can't comprehend how anyone could actually go along with anything like that and expect the outcome to be positive

Perhaps he is a gay 14 year old who was thinking he could get sex and did. Perhaps the outcome was positive from his point of view, even though it was immoral and illegal from the adults point of view.

I remember being 14. If I could have gotten a woman in her early 20s to have sex with me I would have in a heart-beat! Actually I did try a few times to "hit on" college age girls, only to be shot down of course.

I'm not condoning the adult's terrible predatory behavior. He should (and DOES) know better and should be put away. But that doesn't mean the 14 year old didn't want the same thing the adult wanted. He's 14. He doesn't understand the power difference between himself and an adult and why that can't be allowed because of the potential for bad outcomes.

Re:Please mod above as TROLL (1)

Suddenly_Dead (656421) | more than 8 years ago | (#14407307)

Right...

When the suspect was with the victim the suspect touched the victim in a sexual manner. The victim refused the suspect's advances and the suspect stopped. (From here [santa-rosa.ca.us] )

Santa Rosa police arrested Watts on Dec. 15 after the 14-year-old boy revealed details of the alleged relationship to his mother. (From here [mercurynews.com] )

^ Indicating that the molestation was unwanted. As well, if he didn't "understand the power difference", it's unlikely that he would report it to his mother.

Besides that, even if he was a gay 14 year old, meeting a strange man one met over the internet is still a stupid thing to do.

Mmm, /. seems to agree with me (1)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 8 years ago | (#14407627)

And I am not in favor of pedo's. The guy is a sicko and hopefully will get a proper sentence and not the joke sentence I just read about of 2 months for repeated rape of a real kid http://www.wcax.com/Global/story.asp?S=4319605&nav =4QcT%C2%A0%C2%A0 [wcax.com] like this case.

At the age of 13-14 you should be smart enough to figure out basic things. Like say do not meet a stranger who has send you naked movies of himself (this is from the police press release) in a park.

If the kid had been asaulted while just playing in the park he would have had my sympathy but this 13-14 yr old male went on a date with an adult male who had been sending him naked movies of himself. Exactly at what point do you suggest people need to get a sense of responsibilty?

This kid was not abducted, he was not assaulted. if you read the police report what happened was that the boy meets man on date in park, man touches boy, boy objects, man stops, boy goes home, mom finds out and calls the cops.

The man obviously had pedo tendencies but this can barely be called assault let alone rape. The police report and official complaint do not in fact call it that.

No compared to real victims like in the case I linked to above this boy gets no sympathy from me.

/. is a harsh place. If you want crying people watch Oprah. Here we only have sympathy for people who can't help their misfortune.

Re:o_O (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14402140)


Meeting a total stranger in a park after exchanging porn. Oh yeah. That is something nobody has ever warned kids about.

Not having RTFA, 'cause, why bother, I would suspect that the kid was "consenting". Inasmuch as it's possible for a minor to consent, which is to say: legally, not at all. But I think the kid was likely a "willing participant" who probably wanted to explore his sexuality.

That minors should not explore their sexuality with strangers in parks goes without saying. But I would be surprised if it was the kid himself that brought the complaint, or even feels that he was wronged. More likely, it was the parent who learned of it later.

So that said, I don't think the kid was necessarily stupid, as stupidity requires ignorance. He likely knew exactly what the plans were for that evening, and was happy to go along with them.

Re:o_O (1)

Mad_Rain (674268) | more than 8 years ago | (#14404147)

Then again this kid doesn't sound like he is a major loss to the gene pool. Meeting a total stranger in a park after exchanging porn. Oh yeah. That is something nobody has ever warned kids about.

Way to blame the victim. The only way your post could get more ludicrous and insulting is if you said "Hey, now the molester can be anally raped in prison!"

Having sex with ANYBODY AGAINST THEIR WILL is illegal.
Having sex with ANYBODY UNDER THE AGE OF CONSENT is illegal.

Re:o_O (1)

Babbster (107076) | more than 8 years ago | (#14406195)

What? You don't think a 14-year-old bears some responsibility when they go to meet a stranger from the Internet in a park? A stranger who has been sending pornography? There's no doubt that the molester should be put into a hole and left there eating scraps and drinking only water for the rest of his life, but there is something deeply wrong with a 14-year-old kid who acts this way. Even more important, there is something deeply wrong with the way a kid was raised when he acts this way.

I would thus consider the parents to bear some of the responsibility as well considering there was no monitoring of the child's Internet gaming or e-mail. It just about rises to the level of neglect and foster care might be a smart option while those parents are investigated.

Re:o_O (1)

Mad_Rain (674268) | more than 8 years ago | (#14406528)

What? You don't think a 14-year-old bears some responsibility when they go to meet a stranger from the Internet in a park?

Look at it another way - If a woman goes on a date with a guy she "knows," puts on provocative clothing, says "no" to any physical contact, and then gets sexually assaulted by her date, does that mean she's responsible for getting herself raped? Of course not. The guy in this fictional scenario took advantage of a woman who made some poor choices, but ultimately, he took action against a victim.

Same situation here. An adult, who should know it's illegal to A) have sexual contact with a minor, and B) have sexual contact with someone non-consenting, took action against a victim.

there is something deeply wrong with the way a kid was raised when he acts this way.

Well, let's say that there is something wrong with this kid. Perhaps he meets the diagnostic qualifications for mental retardation. Does that make the behavior of the adult any better? Hell no. The adult who assaulted the kid is still responsible for their own behavior.

Re:o_O (1)

Babbster (107076) | more than 8 years ago | (#14406881)

I don't know if the child is mentally retarded, but clearly you're pretty damned slow. I (and the commenter before me) never said anything about the adult being right (and I thought I made that crystal clear in my post).

The adult who assaulted the kid is still responsible for their own behavior.

Yes, the adult is entirely responsible for his actions and, again, should be held so by a court and imprisoned. That said, the adult could not have created this specific situation by himself. The boy had to give his e-mail address (this is not publicly accessible via Xbox Live) to the pedophile, then apparently participated in an e-mail exchange (to arrange the time and place), then went to a park to meet the sicko. The fact that he's 14 doesn't mean he has no responsibility for the situation (in most states, a 14-year-old can be treated as an adult in criminal proceedings, indicating that society has determined that a child of that age should know right from wrong).

As for your specious rape comparison, the situation is quite different in that dating is a standard adult practice, as is wearing "provocative" clothing. There's nothing standard about a child corresponding with a child molester via e-mail and then arranging to meet him in a park.

Now, if that same woman wears provocative clothing, invites a guy to her place, blows in a guy's ear and handles his junk before the rape, then she would have to own some responsibility for the situation - but, again, that doesn't make the attacker right, nor should it be considered a mitigating factor in court. It just means that she shouldn't be actively revving up a date with whom she doesn't want to have intimate contact.

However (1)

fireklar (533430) | more than 8 years ago | (#14405545)

Bit hard to pretend your [sic] HotLisa16F when your voice only comes in over the subwoofer.

But if it comes in over the tweeter...

Misread the headline (1)

amrust (686727) | more than 8 years ago | (#14400861)

I read this as "Mole-ster", when I first saw the headline. I laughed. Like 'Napster'. I thought it was some kind of hack for Xbox Live, or whatever. Then I read the blurb and got sad.

I can't believe people are now resorting to the Xbox live online community for their sexual deviancy, like they didn't have enough innocent kids to prey on with the Internet itself. Creepy B******. I hope they nail that perv to the wall.

Games are supposed to be FUN. You shouldn't have to worry about someone stalking your kids while they play their game console, in the saftey of your own home.

What game? (1)

HeWhoRoams (895809) | more than 8 years ago | (#14400864)

But what game did they meet on? My guess is Spongebob Squarepants! These games are not safe for kids!

Let me bring up a controversial note in this: (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14400884)

Regardless of the fact that the teen was lured to a park by a dirty old man, you have to recognize that the teen went after receiving pornographic materials from the D.O.M. So, while he legally could not consent to anything, as a matter of reality, he had some idea of what he was getting into.

We don't know the nature of the porn, but it seems quite possible that it was of the D.O.M. Is it possible that the teen was curious, went, decided he didn't like the encounter, and turned the D.O.M. in?

I'm not trying to defend the D.O.M. in any way, I just am thinking that the teen wasn't an absolutely innocent victim.

note: ironically, the /. human-check word I have to type in for this message is "convicts."

Read the police press release for confirmation (2, Informative)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 8 years ago | (#14401381)

http://ci.santa-rosa.ca.us/default.aspx?PageId=120 &NewsId=660/ [santa-rosa.ca.us] this shows almost exactly what you say. It seems this 26 yr old male showed movies of himself to this 13yr old boy after meeting on x-box live. it does not become clear how the video is exchanged perhaps via e-mail.

The kid and adult then meet up, adult touches the kid, kid objects, adult leaves him alone, kid cries to mom, police gets involved and a media hype is born.

Frankly this sounds an awfull lot less nasty then the headlines make it out to be.

However kids are allowed to be stupid, adults are not allowed to touch kids in certain ways. The kid is innocent if stupid, the adult is wrong. How wrong is for a jury to decide.

Re:Read the police press release for confirmation (1)

xnderxnder (626189) | more than 8 years ago | (#14402096)

The kid and adult then meet up, adult touches the kid, kid objects, adult leaves him alone, kid cries to mom, police gets involved and a media hype is born.

Frankly this sounds an awfull lot less nasty then the headlines make it out to be.


Exactly. I mean, this all reads like a creepy fag and a horny gay teenage boy. Which, duh, doesn't make it alright, but it's not in the same league as a guy hunting down, abducting and raping a 5 year old.

Let me guess what the media would do... (3, Insightful)

AzraelKans (697974) | more than 8 years ago | (#14400972)

Let me take a wild guess: the media will make a huge unproportioned campaign about the lurking horrors of xbox live, warning that each kid playing is in danger of being a victim of some psycho completely disregarding the fact that a caught red handed child molester got a "get out of jail" card and is happily lurking around as we speak?

Who the fuck cares if it was on live or messenger or whatever? the guy walked!

Im seeing it right now Jack Thompson and "My husband cheated on me while being president" Clinton bragging about the danger of videogames, calling for banning of xbox live (maybe wifi nintendo) "due to the dangers within" completely missing the fact that our fucking law system is unable to keep a pedophile asshole in the place it belongs? heres a note conservatives: don't you think we could do more for "our children" if we could keep the people who actually commited the crime in jail? what about if he had used a phone? whats the solution then? ban phones?

Re:Let me guess what the media would do... (1)

voice_of_all_reason (926702) | more than 8 years ago | (#14401115)

the guy walked!

You are wrong because:
_x_ Failure to read article

There has been no trial yet. He didn't "walk", he posted bail. From my lengthy experience watching Law and Order, bail is usually not denied unless you're dealing with a Capital Crime (murder, rape, terrorism). I can't imagine California would be vastly different than New York.

Re:Let me guess what the media would do... (1)

AzraelKans (697974) | more than 8 years ago | (#14402394)

"Molesting" is.. basically a nice word for "rape"

Re:Let me guess what the media would do... (2, Informative)

jythie (914043) | more than 8 years ago | (#14403299)

Actually, molestation covers a range of activities, including rape, but also including groaping, flashing, and taking naughty pictures. While those are still no-nos to do with a kid (and I'm not sure I would call a 13 year old a child), there is a BIG differnce between flashing someone and raping them.

Re:Let me guess what the media would do... (2, Insightful)

fbjon (692006) | more than 8 years ago | (#14403711)

"Molesting" is.. basically a nice word for "rape"

It appears you are part of the reason there's such a ridiculously overblown media hype around child molesters.

Re:Let me guess what the media would do... (1)

ultranova (717540) | more than 8 years ago | (#14403256)

There has been no trial yet. He didn't "walk", he posted bail.

Which means that he is currently outside of jail, where he can commit any other crimes he will. Which means he walked, at least for the time being. Which means that the parent poster is right and you are wrong.

From my lengthy experience watching Law and Order, bail is usually not denied unless you're dealing with a Capital Crime (murder, rape, terrorism). I can't imagine California would be vastly different than New York.

Isn't sex with minor illegal because it is considered statutory rape ?

Re:Let me guess what the media would do... (1)

Saint Jimmy (943036) | more than 8 years ago | (#14403784)

Molestation is not a capital offense, therefore bail cannot be refused.

Re:Let me guess what the media would do... (1)

patternjuggler (738978) | more than 8 years ago | (#14406722)

a caught red handed child molester got a "get out of jail" card and is happily lurking around as we speak? ... the guy walked!...
  don't you think we could do more for "our children" if we could keep the people who actually commited the crime in jail?


I think there's something about having to be proven guilty in a court of law or some other principle at work. Take a few deep breaths and realize the outside world is not a candy coated padded playground daycare, there are probably more than a few accused child molestors walking around who got off on some technicalities like 'there's no evidence','the witness was lying','the police were sloppy and incompetent and broke the law','it's obvious they didn't actually do it', or 'they're Michael Jackson'.

In other news (2, Insightful)

booch (4157) | more than 8 years ago | (#14401217)

A child predator was caught using a car to lure his victims. Parents and politicians are outraged that cars can be used for such nefarious purposes, and have promised to enact legislation to limit the use of cars. Some are calling for an out-right ban on cars.

At least it wasn't in a church... (2, Insightful)

Stone Rhino (532581) | more than 8 years ago | (#14401230)

...because, you know, molestors never meet their victims through such wholesome, all-american activities.

Seriously, anyone with a grain of sense should be able to see that this is not a valid complaint against Xbox Live. Anywhere adults and minors can congregate and talk, adults who wish to take advantage of minors can find them. Crippling Xbox for the sake of those who fear pedos is no more sensible than the airline policy of not seating men next to children. [nzherald.co.nz] Watch your kids, raise them well, and talk to them yourself to make sure they're not going to see some strange old man. Paranoia is no substitute for parenting.

Re:At least it wasn't in a church... (1)

M.C. Hampster (541262) | more than 8 years ago | (#14402349)

The thing I found most entertaining in your linked article was this statement:

The incident, which happened a year ago, irked Mr Worsley so much that he recently contacted National Party political correctness eradicator Wayne Mapp.

I want to be the National Part political correctness eradicator when I grow up.

The omni-present question.. (3, Insightful)

billn (5184) | more than 8 years ago | (#14401263)

Where were the parents at?

It's this simple:
Put your kids' computers and internet connected devices in a family room, not in bedrooms.
Apply some discipline and supervision with usage.

Like the television, the Xbox and the Internet in general are the new babysitters, and that's bad.

Re:The omni-present question.. (1)

kabocox (199019) | more than 8 years ago | (#14401548)

Like the television, the Xbox and the Internet in general are the new babysitters, and that's bad.

Um, totally stupid as well. I can let my TV be a babysitter because the only way to view shows on my TVs is through the VCR or DVD. We've already done our censoring by choicing what shows and seasons to buy. I have an old N64 with Zelda that they can play for video games. If they want more choices... they can emulate GBA , N64, or Super Nintendo on the PC if they can get daddy off the family PC. We have dailup and the kids don't know the user name/password to get on. That is the biggest safety right there. The leason that my kids learned from Smallville: never ever eat or touch anything that comes from or near green glowing rocks.

From Charmed, my daughter has learned not to practice magic because then your boyfriend would be either an evil warlock, a ghost, or something else along those lines.

Re:The omni-present question.. (1)

technos (73414) | more than 8 years ago | (#14404504)

Very nice trick with the television. Probably cheaper than cable to boot. :)

Just wait for one of them to figure out they can get broadcast television by sticking a wire into one of the jacks on the VCR though.

When it comes to getting into things, never underestimate the craftiness of a kid.

A friend had her nine year old shoulder-surf her password so she could watch Mommy's collection of anime. I don't think the daughter ever got caught for it, fessed up on her own when she asked for a copy of something on DVD.

A coworkers 11 year old learned all about SAM crackers at the library and Administrator'd himself to turn off the proxy software and browse. Only got caught after a month when some porn site installed malware.

When my family got cable TV in 1983/84, my mother would take the cable box to bed with her. That didn't save her long, I bought a broken one with my allowance ($10 box of odds and ends at a garage sale), stuffing it in a case left over from a busted disc drive and running speaker wire through the floor to tap the coax and watch cable on my amber monitor.

I finally got her to let me get a real modem in 1986, to replace a rubber cup 120/300 baud unit Dad had brought me when the company he worked for retired their Altair clone. She would unplug the phone line to the house if she was going to be gone long, because as she put it, "I've seen War Games, mister. I don't want you ending up in Juvy because you called NASA.". So I got real good at picking Master Locks to plug it back in.

I got my first taste of the real internet about a year later during a summer program held by a university. No matter how much pleading went on, she wasn't going to let me use it at home, convinced this time I was going to run her into the poor house sending mail to Europe. No matter how I explained it, she was sure that she was going to see a long distance charge for a call to China. So I signed up for a VAX account without her knowledge and "borrowed" a copy of Xenix so I could use SLIP. (They issued the account even with the form indicating I was ten years old, I still don't understand why.)

They'll shoulder surf you. They'll crack the machine. They'll buy a $20 WiFi dongle with their saved lunch money so they can use the neighbors internet connection.

Re:The omni-present question.. (1)

kabocox (199019) | more than 8 years ago | (#14405360)

Very nice trick with the television. Probably cheaper than cable to boot. :)

Just wait for one of them to figure out they can get broadcast television by sticking a wire into one of the jacks on the VCR though...

They'll shoulder surf you. They'll crack the machine. They'll buy a $20 WiFi dongle with their saved lunch money so they can use the neighbors internet connection.


Well, My biggest trick is that I do all my mass downloads at work and only have dailup at home. I wouldn't actually mind hooking my rabbit ears back up, but I didn't think that it was worth the bother myself. That's how I used to watch TV myself. I got ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, UPN, & 3 public boardcasting stations. Most of what I watched was Fox, UPN, & PBS. (Gotta love Dr. Who.)

My kids already know my password to get into my account for the computer. I got a 300 Gb external HD for Christmas. I movied all my porn, warez apps & games, anime, and 20 Gbs of Manga to it. I don't really mind if my boy discovers it when he is 12-13. (I certainly would have at that age. I'd be more worried if he didn't show an interest in it.) My boy is 5. I have a few years to worry about that. I could always get them hooked on anime & manga at that time. ;) But then I'd have to re-read it all to censor it. ;) Yeah that's it.

What's the matter with kids these days (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14401403)

What's the matter with kids these days?!

I spent the majority of my young teenage years screwing off on IRC with no supervision whatsoever. Everyone knows you don't meet IRL until you know who you're dealing with, I mean it's the internet for christ's sake...

I guess kids just don't have enough paranoia these days. Parents, you need to instill more fear in your children.
For more info, see this page [thebestpag...iverse.net]

On Slashdot First?! O_o (1)

Bellum Aeternus (891584) | more than 8 years ago | (#14401489)

I live in Santa Rosa. Firstly I'd like to say I have no idea how they did anything illegal in any of the parks here with all the homeless people milling about. Secondly, why the hell wasn't think in our local newspapers?

Re:On Slashdot First?! O_o (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14401801)

Dunno. But it was reported in Placerville, CA where this sicko is from.

http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/apps/pbcs.dll/articl e?AID=/20060104/NEWS/601040328/1033/NEWS01 [pressdemocrat.com]

Re:On Slashdot First?! O_o (1)

Bellum Aeternus (891584) | more than 8 years ago | (#14402271)

Thank you very much for the link.

Re:On Slashdot First?! O_o (1)

Rakarra (112805) | more than 8 years ago | (#14405179)

Dunno. But it was reported in Placerville, CA where this sicko is from.

http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/apps/pbcs.dll/articl [pressdemocrat.com] e?AID=/20060104/NEWS/601040328/1033/NEWS01

The Press Democrat is a Santa Rosa area (well, Redwood Empire/Sonoma County area) newspaper, so the grandparent poster had it wrong -- the local paper did cover it.

Too young for online (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14401798)

This brings up an interesting question on what age children should play online games. If it were up to me, I would only have people 16 yrs and above play. If a person (male or female) is between 10-14, they really do not have the maturity to tell if a person is a sexual predator or not. Plus, aren't most games played on Xbox Live carrying a Teen or Mature rating by the ESRB?

Not a big deal (3, Interesting)

Henry V .009 (518000) | more than 8 years ago | (#14401822)

Sorry to burst your bubbles slashdotters, but there are few teenage homosexual boys that don't wind up having sex with 20-somethings at some point.

Re:Not a big deal (1)

Anonymous Cow herd (2036) | more than 8 years ago | (#14403139)

Doesn't matter whether they're gay or not, if they're under the age of consent it's still illegal.

Re:Not a big deal (3, Insightful)

ClintJCL (264898) | more than 8 years ago | (#14403254)

Interracial marriage was illegal too. Law does not equal morality was his point, not that this was somehow legal.

Life is not 0s and 1s.

What about that teacher who 'raped' her student? Now he is 18 and married to her. Should she still be in jail after he is age 18, if, as an adult, he can retroactively say he was not victimized?

Not that I want to defend pedophiles. I actually work at an organization which catches them.

Re:Not a big deal (1)

trickster721 (900632) | more than 8 years ago | (#14407432)

Exactly. If a high school freshman girl does it with some frat boy, does that make her a "little kid" who's been "molested" and the guy a "dirty old man" and a "deviant"? This teenager met an older guy online, looked at naked pictures of him, and then met him in a park for sex. That's a pretty broad definition of "got molested".

My XBL username is MoLestHer... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14403189)

...and for a few moments there, I was really freaked out!

Accused, not convicted (1)

Ankh (19084) | more than 8 years ago | (#14404961)

I wish they wouldn't give people's names out if they are only accused. I could accuse Pat Robertson (say) of molesting children, but it wouldn't make it true. Tell us after there's a conviction.

And yes, that way some people who did wrong but were not convicted go unreported, but better that than destroy someone's life in error. We have no idea if the person mentioned actually did anything to the boy or not.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>