One of my pet peeves

[boedicca]

It crosses the line from investigative reporting because the police are involved and the predator is arrested.

If the police don't have appropriately collected evidence, they can't file charges.

Skirts my statement. The fact is, because the police are involved, the ped is charged, and the ped is lured to the location, it is in fact a sting operation, not simply investigative reporting.

It's still investigative reporting. The reporters have no authority to make an arrest. That is up to the police.

And I don't think this has anything to do with the scenario you mention.

It's an indirect attack on James O'Keefe style reporting which outs favored leftwing cronies doing corrupt things.

 

[Bill O'Olberman]

The shows that your talking about do not carry the weight and authority of the United States government and as such should not be held to anywhere near the same standard as actual police officers or the government.

If To Catch A Predator can convince a pedophile that they are talking to a child and that same pedophile ends up meeting Chris Hansen, where and what is the problem?

I disagree. Every time Chris Hanson gets finished grandstanding, 5-6 cops are waiting outside for the pedophile to gang tackle him like it's 4th and goal in the Superbowl with 3 seconds remaining and the ped has the ball.

If thats the case, thats wrong. Any "evidence" should be inadmissible so nothing will hold up in court.