‘World’s Greatest Dad’ Arrested in Internet Sex Sting
Not our standard fare but a hard one to resist:
A man from Oakland County [Michigan] has been arrested and charged in an Internet sex sting.
Daniel Everett, 33, of Clarkston was talking online with a 14-year-old girl who he met in a chat room. The two had graphic sexual conversations and Everett propositioned the teen to meet him for sex. But that teen was actually an undercover agent from the Attorney General’s office.
Everett was arrested Tuesday afternoon in Novi where he and the teen were to meet. He was wearing a T-shirt with the words, “Worlds Greatest Dad” on the front, when he was taken into custody.
Everett has now been charged with one count of child sexually abusive activity, a 20-year felony, and one count of using the Internet to commit child sexually abusive activity, a 20-year felony.
Less amusing and not clear from the report: Did the Oakland AG’s office hire a 14-year-old and subject her to sexual advances? Or was this an adult pretending to be a 14-year-old? In which case, where’s the crime?
Photo by Michigan Attorney General via AP courtesy USA Today. Story via Drew Curtis’ FARK.
Who the hell wears a “World’s Greatest Dad” shirt when he’s planning on having sex with a 14 year old? Was it supposed to make her feel better: “Yeah, maybe he’s a pedophile, but he’s a great dad, so it’s okay!”
“Less amusing and not clear from the report: Did the Oakland AG’s office hire a 14-year-old and subject her to sexual advances? Or was this an adult pretending to be a 14-year-old? In which case, where’s the crime?”
It doesn’t have to actually be a 14 year old it probably is an adult. The criminal code in most states say it is the act of thinking you are speaking to an underage person and stating what you would do to the under age person as a crime.
But that teen was actually an undercover agent from the Attorney General’s office.
It’s poorly phrased, but I take that to mean the “teen” was actually an undercover agent…
This individual is quite an idiot, however the state should be careful because it may be guilty of entrapment with some of the schemes that it comes up with to catch pedophiles. Everyone, from the ACLU to parents, wants their children safe from pedophiles and predators, but the state has to be careful in how it goes about protecting children or it could risk losing those in custody.
James,
If bank robbers tunneled into a bank vault and there was no money, would it still be classified as bank robbery?
If sewage workers tunneled into a bank vault by accident and didn’t take the money there, would it be a bank robbery?
The difference is intent. I look at these sort of arrests in the same light as the darwin awards. Society is better off without people this clueless walking around.
Since the post wouldn’t have gone up minus that short… am I alone, or does that W look like a pro-wrestling logo?
Yeah, I’m pretty sure it is. Maybe they’ll create a new wrestler persona out of this: “The Pedophile”, who’s slogan is “Do you knoooooooooooowwwwww who your kids are chatting with?”
When an adult has sex with a minor under the belief that the minor is “of age,” his/her intent does not matter. What matters is whether the person is in fact a minor.
When an adult has pretend sex with someone he/she believes to be a minor, but is really an adult, intent is all that matters.
Bithead,
You don’t recognize the great Irish wrestler Ped O’Phile. He was a great one for wrestling with the wee ones.
(chuckle)
Chicks dig great dads.
Or was this an adult pretending to be a 14-year-old? In which case, where’s the crime?
If a DEA agent sets up a drug bust, and the mark gives the DEA agent $1M for the drugs, does it matter that there weren’t really any drugs?
A better question is, should the punishments be different if there weren’t really any drugs?
After all, murder and attempted murder are different crimes, not because of intent, but because of success in commitment. Is there an equivalent “attempted purchase of drugs”, or “attempted sex with a minor”?
Actually, I’m pretty sure it does.
What about a terrorist that is trying to buy weapons/explosives from the FBI that don’t exist?
There are various crimes for “conspiracy” and “attempt” at felonies. They tend to be treated less severely than successful counterpart crimes.
I’ll be sure to inform the blokes being tortured in Gitmo and other places around the world about this distinction. I’m sure they’ll be relieved to find this out.