Burglar turns himself in to help catch a Pedophile

[Nekov]

I just read this news.

A man from the city of Ballarat in southeast Australia knew he was breaking the law last October when he reached into a car with its windows open and took two cellphones and a wallet.

But when he browsed the cellphones and found what appeared to be pornographic images of children, he knew turning himself in was a small price to pay to help police catch the man responsible for taking the photos, the Ballarat Courier reports.

The thief, whose name has been withheld for legal reasons, immediately took the phones to the nearest police station.

Though police told him he may be prosecuted for stealing the phones -- and would likely face charges for allegedly stealing a car last year -- the man agreed to turn himself in if it would help investigators track down and build a case against the child pornographer.

Full article in the link below

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/08/thief-child-pornography-cellphone-turns-himself-in_n_1263268.html

What do you think of this?

[wasteland]

Both of them need to be punished in a way proportional to their crimes. A good action does not make amend for a bad one. Law is not subnuclear physics.

[yorost]

Both of them need to be punished in a way proportional to their crimes. A good action does not make amend for a bad one. Law is not subnuclear physics.

Turning himself in will probably earn him leniency.  They don't want to discourage that behavior.

[Chino]

I think the guy who turned himself in is pretty stupid. Why didn't he just mail in all the evidence to a police station with a note explaining it all, keeping himself anonymous.

[Nekov]

Both of them need to be punished in a way proportional to their crimes. A good action does not make amend for a bad one. Law is not subnuclear physics.

Turning himself in will probably earn him leniency.  They don't want to discourage that behavior.

The guy was sent to prison for a month and charged a $400 fine.

[yorost]

I think the guy who turned himself in is pretty stupid. Why didn't he just mail in all the evidence to a police station with a note explaining it all, keeping himself anonymous.

It probably is more effective to have him as a witness.  Plus, that way would be sending evidence of his crime to police, too.  If he wasn't careful they might identify him, and any hope of leniency would be gone.

[theseoafs]

Both of them need to be punished in a way proportional to their crimes. A good action does not make amend for a bad one. Law is not subnuclear physics.

If they give him a few years for breaking and entering, what they're doing is discouraging criminals from turning themselves in. He got a small fine and was jailed for a month, which I think is appropriate.

[TioJorge]

Both of them need to be punished in a way proportional to their crimes. A good action does not make amend for a bad one. Law is not subnuclear physics.

If they give him a few years for breaking and entering, what they're doing is discouraging criminals from turning themselves in. He got a small fine and was jailed for a month, which I think is appropriate.

This. He committed a crime, but the crime this man committed is much less morally corrupt, vile and dangerous (arguably) than the one the pedophile did. Punishment, but leniency due to his own crimes leading to the discovery of a much more malicious one. I concur, and salute said burglar for not being a sick fuck and hopefully help take this rotting, useless shit down.

But I'd like him much more if he took the law into his own hands, became a vigilante, tracked down the sicko, murdered the pedophile and then got away with it. I really would. Wholeheartedly in every god damn way.

[El Barto]

I'm with Chino.  I recall a story a couple of years ago about a guy who found a VHS tape in the desert containing some naughty video.  He turned it in and they wound up charging him for possessing it,  as they thought he was a little too slow in turning it in.  I doubt they threw the book at him,  but in this country the simple allegation will destroy your life. 

I'm not taking any chances with something so vilified.  I'm dropping it in a mail slot 30 miles from home and washing my hands of it.  Johnny will figure out the owner from the SIM.  If I do decide to act as he did,  it'd only be through my attorney.  Innocent people shouldn't be talking to cops, either.

[YtseBitsySpider]

and off this thread goes to P/R

[MykeHavoc]

He did the right thing and deserves leniency. Lesser of two evils.

[El Barto]

There's also the very real possibility that Mr. Samaritan does 30 days, and Charlie Perv walks thanks to his lawyer and the circumstances of the case.  First thing I'd say if I were the perv was that some Rutger Hauer sick fuck was trying to frame me.  Stole my phone, put pictures on it and turned it in.   He's probably plotting my escape right now.

[Nekov]

There's also the very real possibility that Mr. Samaritan does 30 days, and Charlie Perv walks thanks to his lawyer and the circumstances of the case.  First thing I'd say if I were the perv was that some Rutger Hauer sick fuck was trying to frame me.  Stole my phone, put pictures on it and turned it in.   He's probably plotting my escape right now.

You should remember that this happened in Australia. The law doesn't work the same way in every country.

[theseoafs]

If you just mailed in the phone, then you would have practically no proof that those pictures were actually the pervert's.

The pedophile can only be brought to justice if the burglar turns himself in.

[El Barto]

If you just mailed in the phone, then you would have practically no proof that those pictures were actually the pervert's.

The pedophile can only be brought to justice if the burglar turns himself in.

I don't see how there's much difference in the level of proof.  You've still gut custody issues, regardless of how it gets into Johnny's possession.

Although honestly,  anybody stupid enough to leave evidence of a felony unencrypted and left in plain sight in an unattended car probably screwed up 2 dozen other ways,  so none of this is likely to matter. 

[Chino]

If you just mailed in the phone, then you would have practically no proof that those pictures were actually the pervert's.

The pedophile can only be brought to justice if the burglar turns himself in.

Why? How does turning yourself in make it any more valid?

[El Barto]

Because now you have the testimony of a career criminal to explain that it wasn't actually just a frame job. 

[theseoafs]

It's true that you have custody issues regardless, but few people would go so far as to turn themselves in for burglary in order to frame someone for pedophilia. If a police office receives a phone that they know was stolen in the mail, they won't be able to take that evidence very seriously. But if the burglar throws himself at the mercy of the justice system in order to help catch the pedophile, they can be sure this probably isn't an instance of framing.

Also, we shouldn't forget that the burglar has literally no reason to frame this person. They probably don't know each other. If the justice system determines they do know each other, then obviously they have a bit more investigating to do.

[El Barto]

What you have under either scenario is a very good reason to start an investigation.  Like I said,  the guy's obviously about as smart as a bag of rocks.  If he actually is a Chester,  they're going to nail him for a lot more than the the handful of pix on his cell phone. If all they have is the phone and some custody issues,  they're not doing their jobs right and the outcome won't be what people are wanting. 

And I doubt that the coppers would ignore the phone just because it came to them via the mail.  I suspect getting evidence sent to you anonymously is probably a pretty regular occurrence in their line of work. 

[Chino]

It's true that you have custody issues regardless, but few people would go so far as to turn themselves in for burglary in order to frame someone for pedophilia. If a police office receives a phone that they know was stolen in the mail, they won't be able to take that evidence very seriously. But if the burglar throws himself at the mercy of the justice system in order to help catch the pedophile, they can be sure this probably isn't an instance of framing.

Also, we shouldn't forget that the burglar has literally no reason to frame this person. They probably don't know each other. If the justice system determines they do know each other, then obviously they have a bit more investigating to do.

I would be willing to bet sexual photos of children would be taken very seriously, regardless what they believe the source is. If it included a letter saying he was a thief who stole these from a certain type of car... That would be more than enough to open an investigation. If the guy who was robbed had 2 phones that both had child porn on them, odds are he has it elsewhere. He would be caught and brought down rather swiftly
 

[theseoafs]

You're missing my point. All I'm saying that the evidence the burglar provides by turning himself in with the evidence is far stronger than that provided by mailing in a phone, which is a fact. If you send in a phone with child porn on it with a note that says "I stole Humbert Humbert's phone and it has naughty pictures on it, arrest him", and they search his place and don't immediately come up with anything, they're probably just going to drop the case, thinking the phone was out of Humbert's hands when the porn showed up on it.

Suggesting that the burglar should not have done what he did is silly, since A) this Australian criminal probably knows a fair bit more about Australian law than you do and B) turning yourself in for a crime you committed is, regardless of child porn, the right thing to do.

[Nekov]

What you have under either scenario is a very good reason to start an investigation.  Like I said,  the guy's obviously about as smart as a bag of rocks.  If he actually is a Chester,  they're going to nail him for a lot more than the the handful of pix on his cell phone. If all they have is the phone and some custody issues,  they're not doing their jobs right and the outcome won't be what people are wanting. 

And I doubt that the coppers would ignore the phone just because it came to them via the mail.  I suspect getting evidence sent to you anonymously is probably a pretty regular occurrence in their line of work.

So a guy that goes to the police to provide evidence about a pedophile is dumb? 

[obscure]

I just wanna hug that thief!

[zerogravityfat]

why didn't the idiot mail the phone with a note. win win for him.

[Nekov]

why didn't the idiot mail the phone with a note. win win for him.

Geez, the guy does a really good thing and people call him an idiot?? WTF people? He has a moral conscience, not and IQ of 4. There is a difference.

[theseoafs]

why didn't the idiot mail the phone with a note. win win for him.

Oh, for the love of Christ.

Seriously? You're unhappy a criminal turned himself in, and that a pedophile will likely be caught because of it? Criminals who turn themselves in for the good of society are idiots?

[obscure]

life is more complicated than that.... you can find yourself committing a crime which you think you never would... and vice versa....

[El Barto]

What you have under either scenario is a very good reason to start an investigation.  Like I said,  the guy's obviously about as smart as a bag of rocks.  If he actually is a Chester,  they're going to nail him for a lot more than the the handful of pix on his cell phone. If all they have is the phone and some custody issues,  they're not doing their jobs right and the outcome won't be what people are wanting. 

And I doubt that the coppers would ignore the phone just because it came to them via the mail.  I suspect getting evidence sent to you anonymously is probably a pretty regular occurrence in their line of work.

So a guy that goes to the police to provide evidence about a pedophile is dumb? 

No.  Like I said a few posts up,  a guy who leaves evidence of a felony sitting in an unlocked car, in plain sight is dumb.  The burglar might or might not be, I don't know, but I would certainly have handled it differently.

why didn't the idiot mail the phone with a note. win win for him.

Oh, for the love of Christ.

Seriously? You're unhappy a criminal turned himself in, and that a pedophile will likely be caught because of it? Criminals who turn themselves in for the good of society are idiots?

I'm not unhappy about the situation.  I'm pointing out that the smarter move would have been to try and avoid the whole Chester entanglement,  and in the process,  admitting to your own crimes. 

[Adami]

Don't digital photos, even those taken with a phone have a timestamp placed on them? So the police can see WHEN the pics were taken? All they have to do is ask the guy when his phone was stolen and compare the dates.

[Nigerius Rex]

How would this have worked:

"I found these items in a public place and I perused them to see if I could locate the owner and by golly gosh I found these terrible photos".

Don't digital photos, even those taken with a phone have a timestamp placed on them? So the police can see WHEN the pics were taken? All they have to do is ask the guy when his phone was stolen and compare the dates.

Depends on the phone, but I've seen it vary enough to not be standard. Also, nearly every smartphone allows you to turn off the feature at will.

[soundgarden]

Both of them need to be punished in a way proportional to their crimes. A good action does not make amend for a bad one. Law is not subnuclear physics.

St..St...Stannis?

[slycordinator]

Don't digital photos, even those taken with a phone have a timestamp placed on them? So the police can see WHEN the pics were taken? All they have to do is ask the guy when his phone was stolen and compare the dates.

If you're meaning a date put in the picture itself, no. And if you mean a creation date on the file itself, anyone can change that.

[snapple]

Give the guy a fucking medal after he pays his fines.

[Adami]

Don't digital photos, even those taken with a phone have a timestamp placed on them? So the police can see WHEN the pics were taken? All they have to do is ask the guy when his phone was stolen and compare the dates.

If you're meaning a date put in the picture itself, no. And if you mean a creation date on the file itself, anyone can change that.

Really? I thought Jpegs had timestamps embedded in them. Or something. I dunno.

[glaurung]

Both of them need to be punished in a way proportional to their crimes. A good action does not make amend for a bad one. Law is not subnuclear physics.

St..St...Stannis?