The men attempting to hook up with 13 year olds. Wouldn't they need permission to air the interviews? And why would the perps give their permission?
I'm puzzled.
2006-10-06 20:24:08 · 9 answers · asked by curiosity 2 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Television
the courts have stated that the general benefit to society of reporting on news outweighs ones right to privacy .. additionally, ones right to privacy does not extend to illegal behavior .. \
a good question .. I think there are lots of questions that should be asked of these shows though. not the least of which is:
Is it in the best interest of our society for journalists to create news rather than reporting events?
2006-10-06 20:35:29 · answer #1 · answered by tonkatruk_2001 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I don't know the answer to your question, but the things other people said are just too good to pass up, lol. I for one find the "crime" of creating news rather than reporting it to be far less detrimental to society than preying on teenage girls. The whole thing about entrapment is that you won't be entrapped if you don't do anything wrong. I have no sympathy for perverts. Don't get me wrong- I've been in chat rooms. I understand how easy it is to get caught up in all the lustful fantasies created and acted out on the Internet. This does NOT, however, make it okay to act upon these fantasies in real life. Any guy stupid enough to drive 5 HOURS to an under-aged girl's house to have sex deserves whatever sort of entrapment and public humiliation he gets. As for reading the rights- dude, seriously. There's this thing some people refer to as "TV Magic." I like to call it editing. An intelligent viewer can draw the conclusion that their rights are read even though we don't see it happening. They've got too many other stupid men coming to the house to show us the entire process.
My completely uneducated guess is that they don't have to sign a release because they DO talk to the reporter and because what they're doing is illegal. Good question though. Do the losers on Cops have to sign a release?
2006-10-07 14:57:35 · answer #2 · answered by elizabeth_ashley44 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Great question! I wanted to ask the same thing.
By no means do I defend them, but most of them don't realize that Chris Hanson ISN'T a cop and they end up answering all these questions that they don't have to.
I suppose they're so flustered and scared that they've been caught that they don't realize they don't have to say word one.
After all, they haven't been told that they are under arrest or have been read their rights (at the point that C Hanson talks to them).
I am always just amazed at all the info they give up when what they should be saying is, "I want to speak to my attorney" and then refuse to speak ESPECIALLY to a reporter.
But I'm assuming they are panicked when they first realize their game is up, so there is not much thought process at that point.
Again, I hope nobody thinks I'm defending them!
Thanks for posting the question.
2006-10-07 08:23:59 · answer #3 · answered by mamabunny 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I can't believe that no one responsible for airing that piece of crap hasn't been sued for entrapment. They take police officers off the streets to wait and "dramatically" tackle the people. I wouldn't be surprised if those guys who are the "predators" aren't really paid actors. And doesn't anyone else think that Chris Hanson waiting in the house is creepy and sleazy? I think instead of entrapping people, they need to get the real bad guys who are still online while NBC is busy setting others up.
Plus you never see anyone telling these guys their rights. I think the show is phony. No charges would ever stick without reading a person his rights.
2006-10-07 04:22:30 · answer #4 · answered by GoldnHart 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes, and money. They have to put up a thirty thousand dollar bond, that means three thousand up front. If you were offered money to air this tape and you knew it would get you out of jail, plus they offered to set you up with a lawyer to pleed your case, you might take them up on it. After all, this pretty much taints the jury pool and gives you a strong case for entrapment.
2006-10-07 04:40:24 · answer #5 · answered by LORD Z 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think Dateline said that becuase they are doing a newstory they don't need a release.
2006-10-07 10:12:47 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe that once you have committed a felony you are considered caught in the act of a crime and it's no different than getting caught on a video camera robbing a liqueur store. It's evidence.
2006-10-07 03:36:38 · answer #7 · answered by daisymae 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I was wondering about that too. Strange!
Maybe they're offered a lighter sentence if they agree to be shown on TV? Who knows? It's a neat show, though.
2006-10-07 03:27:19 · answer #8 · answered by catwomanmeeeeow 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yeah! they release them to me and I bite their nuts off!!!!!!!
2006-10-07 03:53:22 · answer #9 · answered by guvner_46 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋