Comment on [deleted]

• DBT@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  It’s probably less “wanting to see a sexting thread with a child” and more “curious what this asshole said that was inappropriate.” Not that absurd.

  For example, if your coworker got fired for saying something inappropriate, would your first question not be, “what did they say that got them fired?”

  Kind of a natural human reaction to be curious.

  source

  • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    This, plus just how egregious was it?

    No one is wanting to read these messages like they’re 50 Shades of Grey or anything like that. Well, there’s probably somebody but that’s not why most want to see it. Clearly it was not bad enough to get the police involved at the time, so we’re talking less than To Catch A Predator.

    Ignoring the age difference for a second, because that part is not relevant to my specific point here… What some people consider flirty, others consider creepy. On a similar note, the same comment coming from a person someone considers attractive and from someone they find ugly often has a completely different reaction.

    Doc says that it crossed a line, that’s not under debate by anyone at this point. He says there were no pictures, etc. exchanged, just messages and there was no intent to meet up or anything like that. On the other side one of the original tweets claimed they were sexting. Peoples definitions of sexting can vary dramatically as well.

    So clearly the messages went over the line of being inappropriate, no argument there from anyone paying attention, but how far over that line was it? Were they truly explicit messages, or just inappropriate within the context of a 35 year old talking to a minor?

    source
• tacosanonymous@lemm.ee ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  I think it’s more about people wanting definitive proof that he knew and that it would be evidence that could warrant legal repercussions.

  source

  • Chozo@fedia.io ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    I'm 100% certain that if he actually didn't know the kid's age beforehand, that he would have said so in one of his responses. If the situation was anything other than what everybody is already suspecting, he would have put it out there instead of letting the internet speculate wildly. He wouldn't just be sitting on that little nugget of information if it existed. He was too specific in his responses to have left that out unintentionally.

    source
• Cornpop@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Have you never seen the show to catch a predator?

  source

  • Chozo@fedia.io ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Yeah, and there's a much different context. Those aren't real children on the show. Those text threads are with adults on both ends. The entire interaction from start to finish is mitigated by professionals.

    We're talking about a situation involving a real child, not a sting operation where there isn't an actual victim. There's a real child whose identity would be put at risk of being exposed by releasing the logs.

    This isn't primetime TV drama. This is a real situation involving a real minor.

    source

    • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      And you just know some one will end up trying to dox the kid, too.

      source
    • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      DAMN! Did everybody else hear that mic drop too???

      source
• crossmr@kbin.run ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Because until we see it, unedited, we don't really know the truth of what occurred.

  source