Gothamist: Vigilante Justice on the Lower East Side

Bishara Hakeem

Wed, 04 Apr 2007 18:35:58 -0500

Arguing on the internet is like running in the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded.

MacPherson

Sun, 28 Jan 2007 21:18:59 -0500

I am a police officer surrounded by pedophile enablers not sure what to do. I might be paralysed by my own history of abuse. I know the difference between right and wrong and that children should not be molested but I am caught up in a subculture of lies. Lonely and Desperate Cop

Karen Dickson

Sat, 02 Dec 2006 21:37:18 -0500

What do you do when you serve the community as a prosecutor for almost ten years and the pedophile in the office, your boss, uses Children's Ad to apprehend your child? What do do when you have a writing campaig of almost twelve months and you have not seen your child since September 2, 2006? What do you do when you jnow the system of justice is corrupt and they want you attend a mock CAS hearing to get back ... maybe not even your child? Are you justified if you shoot to kill?. Is there a court in the land (Canada) who should put a mother behind bars for protecting her child? Let me know folks. I need to shoot now because I have writer's block. Karen Dickson Barrister and Solicitor 905 824-4822

You can't handle the truth!

Sun, 26 Mar 2006 15:40:29 -0500

Perverted Justice's alter ego site, .net, likes to say that the members of www.corrupted-justice.com are pedophiles because they oppose PJ's vigilante tactics. No, .net says that the cj.commers are pedophiles because their founder and leader and head of the "bust interception department" is a self admitted member of NAMBLA. For more information on Matt Carpenter visit; http://corrupted-justice.net/?archive=22 If there were any truth behind their words they would have drummed out someone who thinks the documented, recored and used in court chat transcripts are "hot". They wouldn't coddle and defend those that prey on children and admit to being NAMBLA members. "unemployed gamer" is quite a harsh epithet compaired to "self admitted child molester" like cj.com's founder Carpenter is. Incidentally, what about the 35 or so contributors to PJ.com? Are they all unemployed gamers? What if the police officers that post at PJ were gamers? Is that somehow supposed to invalidate the 150 pending arrests, court cases, convictions that are currently in the pipe? How does "nasty language" compare to 50 arrests in Riverside CA in one weekend? Actually, the only comment you made that is worth a hill of beans is the front page graphic content of perverted-justice.com Children shouldn't read it and that's why the pages are all metatagged as adult. Any "net nanny" type of software will automatically filter out PJ for kids that might try and surf to the site. Anyway, it's a bit of an oxymoron. All kids are subjected to that kind of language if they enter a yahoo chat room. They don't have to surf to perverted-justice.com, they're subjected to it online everyday by the same people that cj.com coddles and apologizes for and enables. As to the score? I'll do the math for myself. 49 convitions are 49 less that might be grooming kids right now. Why do the founders of CJ.com complain about arrests, as in the above comment? Because they don't like to see their breatherin convited or outed on the main page of Perverted-justice.com. Cj contends that they want PJ to work with police. Until they get awesome results. In a recient thread at cj.com pedophile enablers wish for the old days of perverted justice when calls and flyers went out to warn locals. Read from London Guy at CJ.com; This is probably their youngest one yet. The guy's only 19. While I don't condone a 19 year old hitting on a 12 year old, certainly the guy didn't deserve this. Embarrasing him would've been more than enough punishment, but to ruin his life is just going way too far. In reference to a convited internet groomer who tried to meet up with a 12 year old girl. The Naval Criminal Investigation Service took PJ's recorded transcript of his chats and met him instead. Now, he's in Levenworth instead of trying to rape a pre-teen. CJ.com's dim web administrator Scott Morrow only manages to question PJ's protocols he pretends to understand. So I wonder what happened to their age restrictions on busts? Are they ignoring it because this guy was military? (More publicity for PJ when they go after a serviceman, teacher, authority figure...) Completely missing the point that the forum he cleans up for is populated by those that seek to aid pedophiles. Does he care, or is he prohibited by his higher-ups from pointing out that CJ.com's most frequent poster, "black widow", equates raping children to poor judgement? Read at cj.com; At 19, men and women are still stupid kids that make poor judgements. They drive drunk, use drugs, etc...think they are invincible. They do really dumb things. His life may be ruined. And one of the worse things? PJ follow-uppers are digging up as we speak his parents info, his school's info, his friend's info and posting it all for everyone to see Black widow seems to think that all adults have at one time or the other tried to rape a child. Cj.com is filled with nothing but enablers, apologists and pedophiles themselves. It's true, you won't find rosey language at either PeeJ or corrupted-justice.net but then we don't view the world through rose colored glasses. We don't think that pedophilia is a "lifestyle choice" or some sort of right of passage. We also don't think that the cleanest of language can hide the filthy history and dark opinions of the denizens of cj.com. Completly missing the point that his forum is populated

And now for the truth

Fri, 24 Mar 2006 22:32:22 -0500

Perverted Justice is just that. Perverted. They post graphic chat logs they have created themselves. "Busts" on their main page are said to be verified chat logs, the rest are submitted by their members. Why would a site that is claiming to protect children allow those children in to read that filth and view perverts playing on webcams? 4 years online, 30,000 members (they claim), and a whopping 49 arrests? Do the math. It is only recently that they have even started to involve law enforcement; for show. The owner, Xavier von Erck - not his real name by the way, he's actually Phillip Eide - is an unemployed online gamer. He needs the site to support his lazy lifestyle. Donations allow him to sit at home and play games. Perverted Justice's alter ego site, .net, likes to say that the members of www.corrupted-justice.com are pedophiles because they oppose PJ's vigilante tactics. But go on over and read for yourself. Cj.com is a civilized, factual site. cj.net is full of filth and obscenities; a nice peek at what PJ people are really like.

Kill'em first, let god sort them out

Fri, 24 Mar 2006 12:36:42 -0500

This is EXACTLY what is done by cyber-vigilante groups such as perverted-justice.com. With no way of verifying the information, with no way of knowing who is making the accusation or why, with none of the facts surrounding the accusation it is simply that - A baseless and defamatory accusation. Wow, Lies much? Baseless? While this flyer doesn't contain any proof of accusations, that doesn't mean there isn't any proof. Frankly, if I had proof of a child molester and the police weren't doing anything about it, I'd post a flyer much like this one in hopes that the accused would take me to court. Then, in front of the judge I'd happily spring the proof. For those that care to take the time to investigate PJ.com, they'll find that when readers of PJ post flyers there is plenty of proof. do you call it baseless when there are witness's to a crime? Our justice system, a system that WE (as citizens) demand of our government requires more than an anonymous accusation before someone is to be punished for something. That's why we also demand trained, accountable law enforcement to deal with criminals on our behalf, not some loser do-gooder running around putting up posters Yeah, uh huh, thanks for that juvenile description of how "OUR" system works. Law enforcement is predicated on average citizens reporting crime and judging criminals. Juries are populated with laymen. Police take tips all the time. What would you do if you saw a crime? What would you do if the police didn't respond? It sounds to me like you have an axe to grind against perverted justice. It sounds to me like you seem to favor those that would abuse children. ANYONE who bases their conclusions of guilt or innocence on the words of an anonymous coward posting fliers needs to seriously examine their ethics. While predators are certainly worthy of the harshest punishment possible, shouldn't we be doing everything in our power to ensure those being accused actually DESERVE that punishment first? How remarkablily ironic that this person should use the term "ethics". I think you've seriously missed the point of a flyer like this. It's not to determine guilt or innocense. It's to warn people to be careful. There is a huge difference, if you can't fathom that then you should probably keep your ALL CAPS cliche's to yourself. Most people with a reasonable sense of morality can tell the difference. Most people don't find any fault with protecting their kids by excluding them from a potentially dangerous person. Regardless if a person is convicted of a crime or not, they can still be a child molester. I'm sure that statement really bothers the poster of the quote. Plenty of men are acquited of rape on technicalities. They may not have been punished or even judged gulity, but they are still rapists and should be shunned and our children protected from them. If you don't understand that, it's your ethics that are flawed and need examination. Those like two.oh don't have the ability to imagine what THEIR life would be like if THEY were anonymously and mistakenly accused of such a horrendous crime. And apparently you don't "have the ability to imagine what" a CHILD'S life would be like to be raped by someone you've sheltered, enabled or apologized for simply because they haven't been thrown into jail by a seriously flawed judicial system, yet. Courts don't make child molesters, people with the above mindset do. Protect the children first, then work to convict the rapist. To reverse these priorties, as the above poster has done, is nothing short of enabling rape and dismissing the victim. Note how the above has directed all their sympathy and compassion toward the suspect rapist. Where is your concern for the victim? I think it best to examine your own lack of acceptable ethics before you capitalize yourself into the ranks of NAMBLA.

GoldBond

Thu, 23 Mar 2006 15:35:35 -0500

The poster had absolutely nothing to do with perverted-justice.com, so please stop grasping at straws. Corrupted-justice is a site only concerned that men who have inappropriate chats with what they think are little kids aren't outed. One of the members is the mother of a man(Tommy Cison)that was busted by PeeJ. Another member is an admitted member of NAMBLA. They pose as a "civil rights" group,however they are more concerned with the rights of pedophiles than with making sure kids are safe. Go to PeeJ and read the chats. Then please go to corrupted justice and see the nonsense they believe. PeeJ does wonderful work , and have aided in the arrest of 49 men who made arrangements to meet up with children for sex. CJ.com does absolutely nothing productive for our society. Please check it out for yourselves. It's just like CJ.com to make wild accusations about PeeJ. Don't try to pick up little kids online and you will have nothing to worry about with PeeJ.

seaned

Thu, 23 Mar 2006 15:31:38 -0500

worried and Disgusted, What with the arrests of hundreds of possible child molesters by Law Enforcement with the help of Perverted-Justice.com your old arguments are showing which side of the pedophile fence you people at Corrupted-Justice are sitting at...

No Pedos

Thu, 23 Mar 2006 15:12:48 -0500

The post above looks like the work of corrupted-justice.com. While they masquerade as protecting civil rights, in no cases have actually done so, they are in fact a pro-pedophile group with motives of their own. Only they have never even begun to try to look legit! CJ isn't really everything it appears to be - Here's a group that has uncovered some pretty scary stuff about the "civil rights" group - Check it out at http://www.corrupted-justice.net.

Disguised

Thu, 23 Mar 2006 14:21:37 -0500

This looks like the work of Perverted-Justice.com. While they masquerade as protecting the rights of children, and in some cases have actually done so, they are in fact a vigilante group with motives of their own. Only recently have they begun to try to look legit! PJ isn't really everything it appears to be - Here's a group that has uncovered some pretty scary stuff about the vigilante group - Check it out at http://www.corrupted-justice.com.

Worried

Tue, 21 Mar 2006 17:50:43 -0500

This is vigilantism, pure and simple. This is EXACTLY what is done by cyber-vigilante groups such as perverted-justice.com. With no way of verifying the information, with no way of knowing who is making the accusation or why, with none of the facts surrounding the accusation it is simply that - A baseless and defamatory accusation. Our justice system, a system that WE (as citizens) demand of our government requires more than an anonymous accusation before someone is to be punished for something. That's why we also demand trained, accountable law enforcement to deal with criminals on our behalf, not some loser do-gooder running around putting up posters. ANYONE who bases their conclusions of guilt or innocence on the words of an anonymous coward posting fliers needs to seriously examine their ethics. While predators are certainly worthy of the harshest punishment possible, shouldn't we be doing everything in our power to ensure those being accused actually DESERVE that punishment first? Those like two.oh don't have the ability to imagine what THEIR life would be like if THEY were anonymously and mistakenly accused of such a horrendous crime. Once the posters go up, whether correct or not, your life would very likely be destroyed... And you couldn't do squat about it because you have no idea who made the accusation - And even if you could figure it out, it's like tearing open a pillow at the top of a mountain - Mistaken or not, you'll never get all the feathers back in...

Karen

Tue, 21 Mar 2006 14:13:42 -0500

1. I wonder if these people consulted an attorney, or the police, or City Hall, to see if they are within thier rights to post this. 2. The man named...I bet he's consulted an attorney by now. If he sees one person posting this paper, thats the one he'll sue the house out from under. 3. Why didn't they just post something, hold neighborhood meetings, saying that in this day and age, we all have to look out for each others' kids? It takes a village, and all that. And...hey, when I was a kid, I knew, that the lady down the street would be on the phone to my mother, if she saw me doing something wrong. I got my ass kicked more than a few times, because the my friends' parents ratted me out-and I know my mother ratted them out. Get the kids knowing, that if everyone on the block or in the building is not just looking out for their safety, but will rat on them, to thier parents, or the police if its bad enough, if they do wrong. Looking out for someone works both ways. 4. If we went into anyone's bedroom...I bet we'd find something someone amoung us thinks is illegal or immoral. For all we know, this guy had a one night stand with a very young looking 25 year old. There's no explanation as to how the poster gets the idea that this guy is a teen raper. Hey...when I was 25, when I was 30, I still had a hard time in bars, trying to prove that I didn't have a fake license with a fake birth date on it. Those days are gone....

Heee-eeey

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 21:37:59 -0500

What a fucking waste of internet time. The two of you, go jerk off into the toilet and be done with it.

rev pays

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 18:09:41 -0500

13 to 17 in the LES is equivalent to 26 to 35 in other areas of the city. And, a bun in the oven. I kid, I kid.

Perv

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 18:01:54 -0500

No two.oh, your obviously blowing this way out of proportion. As you can see by the notice, the man may only be going after 13 to 17 year olds. If theres grass on the field, play ball! //Its a JOKE. Try not to form a support group to get me.

two.oh

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 17:56:28 -0500

Haha, "pot calling the kettle back"? zzzzzzzzzzzz

two.oh

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 17:49:38 -0500

Er, how would putting up your own name offer 'credibility'? I think it offers more of a vulnerability. All I'm seeking from you, is a reason as to why this person would put this up in the first place --which neither of us know, and which you haven't seemed to imply yet. "Which would lead to Police Action, Right? Note I didn't say Name an alleged Victim." You didn't answer my question. Would you want to see the details in the public streets? I wouldn't. Would you? And how do you know that by stating specific details, would lead to police action? It's an accusation without evidence of any kind. As I stated before, it's a warning. "Your Assuming that man is guilty on the basis of a posted Note, nothing more. You have absolutely no evidence, but your wiling to keep a look out for One Man instead of being careful in general. What information would that be other than the note?" Um, no, I replied to YOUR post because YOU had no evidence. Please tell me which makes more sense. Someone puts a warning sign about a sexual predator just to get back at someone, or someone puts up a sign because he/she/they has known about several cases. I'm a man who requires evidence, as seen in my post about Littlejohn. However, I didn't say that the post was legitimate, did I? I was merely stating that it makes MORE sense for someone to put it up for legitimate purposes. "And there you have it. Your sarcasm is ok, other's isn't. Nice personal attack, which I have not engaged in." Personal attack? If I wanted to personally attack you, I'd tell you were a moron. But I don't think you are. Just refrain from being sarcastic will you? This is the third time I have to tell you this. You're blowing this way over proportion.

S.D.

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 17:32:22 -0500

rev pays, it's scary how people will foam at the mouth based on a Flyer posted by a totally anonymous stranger. Nuts.

S.D.

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 17:29:11 -0500

Alright, you're obviously not here to seriously try and discuss this intelligently, so I'll just leave up my last few points. Bash if you wish. And there you have it. Your sarcasm is ok, other's isn't. Nice personal attack, which I have not engaged in. ""Why didn't the person who put that Up put their own name?" Um, if you're trying to warn people about a potential sex offender, why would you give your name? What relevance would it have if its warning people?" Credibility, which that note has none. "Why not some background Info? (i.e. "He did this, he did that.")" Um, rather, would you want to hear about how some 13 year old girl raped, posted like an advertisement on the street? Which would lead to Police Action, Right? Note I didn't say Name an alleged Victim. "Why Not Advice to Call 911?" Okay, well, you have a point there, but don't you think that's already a given? You're ASSUMING that this is some sort of personal vandetta, and that someone has this 'agenda' to organize a lynch mob. Do you have any evidence? Because I think it's far more logical (given the information here) to believe that there had been incidents that had occurred, and since there are no leads, someone (or some group) went out of their way to put these up as a warning. Your Assuming that man is guilty on the basis of a posted Note, nothing more. You have absolutely no evidence, but your wiling to keep a look out for One Man instead of being careful in general. What information would that be other than the note? "As if"? Refrain from the stupid comments, will you? The Pot Calling the Kettle black... Rather than continue to feed the troll, I'm done. "two.oh", keep believing everything you read.

rev pays

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 17:16:26 -0500

The flyer did mention what the preditor is capable of. He's very cunnining and manipulative. Now if that isn't enough to string him up, I don't know what is. I wonder what was his AKA?

two.oh

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 17:10:40 -0500

Forgive the typos. What I meant to say was, would you really want to hear about how a crime happened in distinct detail about a sex offender with a 13-year old girl? It doesn't make sense. Who in their right mind would do that? Perhaps the sex offender....

two.oh

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 17:08:55 -0500

Alright, you're obviously not here to seriously try and discuss this intelligently, so I'll just leave up my last few points. Bash if you wish. "Why didn't the person who put that Up put their own name?" Um, if you're trying to warn people about a potential sex offender, why would you give your name? What relevance would it have if its warning people? "Why not some background Info? (i.e. "He did this, he did that.")" Um, rather, would you want to hear about how some 13 year old girl raped, posted like an advertisement on the street? "Why Not Advice to Call 911?" Okay, well, you have a point there, but don't you think that's already a given? You're ASSUMING that this is some sort of personal vandetta, and that someone has this 'agenda' to organize a lynch mob. Do you have any evidence? Because I think it's far more logical (given the information here) to believe that there had been incidents that had occurred, and since there are no leads, someone (or some group) went out of their way to put these up as a warning. "Oh and BTW, You've demonstrated you have any idea what your talking about? As if." "As if"? Refrain from the stupid comments, will you?

S.D.

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 16:55:47 -0500

Back Again. Sure, "two.oh." and it named someone who May or May not have done anything. Did you read it? Does it warn about an actual Registered Sex offender? No?Why didn't the person who put that Up put their own name?Why not some background Info? (i.e. "He did this, he did that.")Why Not Advice to Call 911? The Only problem I have is that they Named someone without providing the Slightest amount of info with it. Children being careful is Always a good idea and now they'll look for this guy instead of just being careful for everyone. Oh and BTW, You've demonstrated you have any idea what your talking about? As if.

adad

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 16:29:53 -0500

20 bucks that felix is the predator.

two.oh

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 16:25:38 -0500

S.D, Do you have any idea what you're talking about? Whoever put up those signs, obviously isn't a gang, and your example is completely irrelevant in comparison. Read the sign again. It isn't calling for a witch hunt, it's calling people to be careful and to be safer. Please read properly before rambling on into whatever tangents you're on.

rev pays

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 16:19:44 -0500

You're telling me the vaulted SVU unit would do nothing? Well, maybe they would seeing all those typos. Now on to my dave chapelle reference, calling all cars, calling all cars, be on the lookout for a male five two to six nine. I'll be stayin home tonight.

j

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 16:08:12 -0500

I'm with Ed - one person's probable cause is another person's daughter...or maybe they're just focusing all their energy on "quality of life" tickets?

rev pays

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 15:18:35 -0500

x, you mean the real A team with a real Black guy? Then, that's Peter Griffin's A team. Hellooooooo, Cleveland!

x

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 15:12:39 -0500

ed- FYI: If you do call the A-team, make sure it's the real one, not the "fake" one that is headed by Peter Griffin. He and his pals are a bunch of f**k ups.

S.D.

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 15:10:48 -0500

Hey, I'm back from the Brooklyn Bridge. "So, your comments do not reflect the actual, just the illusion of the perfect world." So your basically saying you believe everything you read. Ok... Tel you what: Find That Sign, Look that guy up and DON'T HURT HIM, just yell alot and make the news. Going back to put more "For Sale" Signs up. Asshole, huh? Nice!

rev pays

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 14:50:08 -0500

Yes, won't SOMEBODY think of the Children?

Kojak

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 14:49:09 -0500

Chill out ed. If your daughter needs an escort to school, call the A-Team.

ed

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 14:33:01 -0500

S.D. Check it out -- Apparently you don't have kids and it appears you're not from the neighborhood. So, your comments do not reflect the actual, just the illusion of the perfect world. Why don't you come down to the neighborhood some time, after dark and spend a little time with the indigenious elements. While you're here, why don't you escort the kids, especially the young girls that have to walk the neighborhood because they have no other choice. I could care less about spineless, gelded neanderthals. Sorry gave you too much credit - assholes.

HaHa

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 13:54:45 -0500

Given the number of typos, it was obviously written by a member of the Gothamist editorial board...my guess is J.C.

S.D.

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 13:53:47 -0500

"Just out of curiousity, if this was posted by a community board, or just a group of concerned locals, would it still just be 'an agenda'?" Actually, Yes. How's This: Someone put up a flyer at work saying Prospective new gang members are initiated by killing the drivers of cars who flash their headlights at them. Should we jump at this piece of paper too? "For those who criticize such an honorable, lest you daughter been found raped and dead on some alley."? (sigh) Hey, Ed, suppose it's YOUR Name put up? Would you think it's honorable in that Case? Riiiiiggghhtt, it's honorable that Someone who was too much of a coward to put their OWN name on this piece of paper. You want to believe everything you read on an Anonymous piece of paper, hey, knock yourself out. The proper way to do this is Simple: Go to the Police. File out a Complaint. What? The Police will take No Action? Try it and see. If you will all excuse me, I'm going out to post a "For Sale" sign on the Brooklyn Bridge.

anonymous

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 13:35:41 -0500

Fuck vigilanteism.

ed

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 13:16:00 -0500

Having been brought up on the Lower East Side, if it takes someone to inspire the neighborhood to look out for the young people, then it's fine and should be encouraged. For those who criticize such an honorable, lest you daughter been found raped and dead on some alley.

two.oh

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 12:58:26 -0500

Just out of curiousity, if this was posted by a community board, or just a group of concerned locals, would it still just be 'an agenda'? For all we know, and for all Jake knows, this could have been posted by a bunch of individuals. The point being here is, nobody here really knows, so you can't really say that it's 'nothing more'. I was disturbed by the Littlejohn posting of his 'exclusive photo on Gothamist', since there wasn't any underlying evidence at the moment, but now there is a posting of someone's seemingly personal vendettas without noticing that there have been previous cases of harrassments?

S.D.

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 12:41:41 -0500

"Cops have a tendency to be complacent about any kind of issues that could have been prevented."?? Yes, Probable Cause is such a problem, isn't it? (sigh) It's a Piece of PAPER put up by someone with an Agenda, nothing more.

two.oh

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:57:52 -0500

Usually, the cops don't do anything until there are a series of rapings, or offenses that start becoming a pattern or threat --and only until it gets publicized (Nicole duFresne, Imette St. Guille). Cops have a tendency to be complacent about any kind of issues that could have been prevented. I'm not surprised that there is someone that may just want people to be aware of these things, and trying to prevent another terrible incident.

S.D.

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:47:27 -0500

Yep, my thinking too.

iceberg

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:47:25 -0500

can't we have Jake Bronstein do something about this?

KipEsquire

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:34:35 -0500

If the target has not actually been convicted of child molestation, then the act of posting this flier is actionable defamation.

Paddy

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 10:49:27 -0500

My purpose isn't to beat a dead horse, but the first thing that came to mind when I saw this was the mugshot posting brouhaha from 2 weeks back.

RetailWhore

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 10:48:42 -0500

It seems to me that if there's a problem, they should go directly to the police and tell them about this man. If the person who made these flyers feels that there's enough evidence to get this guy convicted of a crime that will get him registered as a sex offender, why is s/he messing around with posters? This is a horrible idea, and there are so many ways this could backfire. What if this guy is really doing this stuff, gets scared off by these posters, and goes somewhere else to do the same thing? Maybe this is what the person who made the flyer wants? The NIMBY mentality is ultimately damaging and has no place in this society.

Rocknrope

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 10:47:03 -0500

Someone should put up a follow up: "BEWARE, we have a poor spelling vigilante in our neighborhood (LES). She is very cunniningus."

DickJones

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 10:37:40 -0500

I agree with S.D. I tend to get suspicious over these types of viliganted posting, especially with a name being mentioned. This poster might have his own personal agenda in mind.

S.D.

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 10:33:16 -0500

"lets all work together to get him registered as a sex offender."? Without being convicted? Good luck. This is a big mistake, suppose it's just put up by someone with an incredible grudge?

Kojak

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 10:27:06 -0500

Vigilantes are acceptable. To a point… The Guardian Angels for example worked with the police to bring in the criminals. What we don't want is for people taking justice into their own hands and start handing down beat downs or worse, no matter how much someone may deserve it.

homeopt

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 10:24:03 -0500

Thank God they don't have a predator in the neighborbood. I'd be really worried then.