Live-streaming ‘Paedophile hunting’ is on the rise – but are people right to take the law into their own hands?

For a nation that already feels deflated by the unfortunate loss of support by police forces, perhaps upping police officer numbers would deter unqualified people from play-acting at enforcing the law

Serena Lipscomb
Sunday 25 August 2019 13:37 BST
Comments
Groups around the world are taking it upon themselves to expose and enable the conviction of suspects who are approaching children online
Groups around the world are taking it upon themselves to expose and enable the conviction of suspects who are approaching children online

Since becoming prime minister, Boris Johnson has made promises to the public through several law and order announcements which will affect England and Wales.

One proposal is that 20,000 more police officers will be hired by 2022. There is pressure on Johnson to deliver on this recruitment plan following mounting scrutiny from both members of the cabinet, and a proportion of the general public who equate a link between police numbers and the increase of violent crime.

With a lack of police support felt by communities nationwide, the public seems to have embraced taking the law into its own hands. And “citizen arrests” of suspected predators of children is one way many are doing it.

The rise of the so-called “paedophile hunters” has become an internet sensation, with groups not just in Britain but around the world who are taking it upon themselves to expose and enable the conviction of suspects who are approaching children online.

For safeguarding reasons, the children these predators approach are in fact decoys, meaning they are not real, just pictures of children fronting fake accounts that remain dormant until spoken to by an adult. These decoys are aged anywhere between eight and 15 years of age.

The hunters play the role of an underage child until a “meet” is suggested by the predator. Then a meeting is arranged between the suspect and “child”. When the alleged paedophile arrives to meet with the minor, they are instead confronted by often more than one “paedophile hunter”, who then accuse and interrogate the suspect while, in many cases, live-streaming the confrontation on Facebook.

Recordings of meets protect the hunters and suspect in court so that a “he said/she said” situation can be avoided, but the live-streaming also invites thousands of viewers who are free to leave comments of hatred and speculation towards a person who may or may not be guilty of the suspected crime.

So, is live-streaming these encounters ethical and the right choice for these groups?

With any live-streamed video, participants are open to criticism and comments, but, understandably, in many respects, when potential predators are concerned, comments tend to be much more unsavoury, with requests to murder, hang or torture the yet to be convicted, and therefore not guilty until proven, suspected predator.

Oliver, a member of a paedophile hunter organisation called Wolf Pack Hunters UK, commented: “Our admin team aims to remove any comments that have connotations of bigotry. It’s difficult to get through all of them if they are coming in live, but we will return to the comments after the live-stream and remove anything inappropriate.

“By this I mean discriminatory on grounds of belief, race, identity and orientation. Unless the orientation is towards children and then we’re OK with discriminating. We don’t police that, but we do encourage people not to approach the person, their home, or family in real life.”

It perhaps serves to bear in mind that while targeting suspects, the live-streamed videos can be humiliating for the innocent families of accused individuals.

It’s not uncommon to hear the distraught wailing of children and partners in the background as suspects often phone to confess or alert them of the unfolding drama. Sometimes, the suspect is even confronted at their family home. These events are all live-streamed in front of thousands watching via social media.

Oliver from Wolf Pack Hunters UK believes the viewing figures are too low to make much of an impact, however. He said: “Some of the most-watched stings I’ve seen have been watched by around 1,000,000 people in total and so nationally, if not globally, that’s still a relatively small figure.

Independent Minds Events: get involved in the news agenda

“Beyond the fairness of a fair trial, I guess you could ask if it’s morally fair. We had a case last year where we caught a man and following the live-stream about six real life victims who had been abused by him as children felt able to finally come forward. It’s not fair that this man was abusing children without impunity for years but it’s definitely fair that past victims can find justice and that future victims can be prevented. Without the live-stream element neither of these things might have been possible.”

However, not all of these organisations live-stream their sting operations due to the prospect of compromising trials.

A spokesperson from Dark Justice commented: “We don’t live-stream nor do we condone it. Many do, but for us we wait until a suspect has been convicted before we release any details about them. Many will argue this but live-streams have the potential to cause more harm than good.”

With that in mind, perhaps upping police officer numbers will be a positive, if small step, in the right direction regarding crime control and prevention. For a nation that already feels deflated by the unfortunate loss of support by police forces, perhaps it would deter unqualified “hunters” from play-acting at enforcing the law. We could all do without turning very serious but not yet proven allegations into an uncensored spectator sport.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in