Nz travel agent being charged for running 'sex tours'

[Brisboy82]

I'm not sure if I am allowed to provide the link here. A man in nz was followed by an undercover police agent because upon returning from Thailand customs rounds photos of him with his arm around 'teenage looking boys'. The undercover cop emailed him saying he was interested in meeting young boys in Thailand and this said he wants no part of anything illegal. After a lot of correspondence the agent told the cop that certain areas o Thailand might be of interest to him. Other evidence includes the fact that the metadata of the travel agency's website included the words 'gay' and 'boys'.

I don't know what further
Evidence will be released about the conversations between these guys but what I find disturbing is that this guy was followed around by police for having been seen with 'teenage looking boys in thailand' which could well refer to a Thai guy anywhere up close to 30 years old. That's enough to be under investigation?

And for the word 'gay' in website metadata to he considered as evidence of sex crimes is a very disturbing thing.

[gaymandenmark]

I know nothing about this case, but
maybe it was not:
"And for the word 'gay' in website metadata to he considered as evidence of sex crimes is a very disturbing thing."
but:
"Other evidence includes the fact that the metadata of the travel agency's website included the words 'gay' and 'boys'."

The question about using the word "boy" has been discussed before, and I must admit that I almost never use it, because it can be misunderstood, especially outside Thailand and Pattaya.

[Brisboy82]

I know nothing about this case, but
maybe it was not:
"And for the word 'gay' in website metadata to he considered as evidence of sex crimes is a very disturbing thing."
but:
"Other evidence includes the fact that the metadata of the travel agency's website included the words 'gay' and 'boys'."

The question about using the word "boy" has been discussed before, and I must admit that I almost never use it, because it can be misunderstood, especially outside Thailand and Pattaya.

I understand how the word 'boys' or even 'gay boys' can be interpreted to arouse suspicion but these words were not clustered together and were considered as two separate pieces of evidence. Apparently the 'gay' on it's own was taken as evidence. Keep in kind this is metadata that can't even be seen by the public and this was just a standard run of the mill travel agency.

What really is disturbing is that without yet having any further evidence the responses in Thaivisa are running the usual 'shoot the bastard' 'hope he gets what is owing to him in prison' etc etc.

[latintopxxx]

Guys, please do a little bot of research instead of jumping to conclusions....the travel agent was taped bragging that whilst in Thailand on holiday he picked up a 14 year old boy who was very experienced...or something to that effect...so the word boy and 14 years old was mentioned.
Scum like this should be punished as they say"to the fulkl extent of the law"or even further if possible; a 14 year old ?? for Budda's sake!! Completelyy unacceptable in any country or society.
Please stop trying to excuse this vile, sickening behaviour....

[Brisboy82]

Guys, please do a little bot of research instead of jumping to conclusions....the travel agent was taped bragging that whilst in Thailand on holiday he picked up a 14 year old boy who was very experienced...or something to that effect...so the word boy and 14 years old was mentioned.
Scum like this should be punished as they say"to the fulkl extent of the law"or even further if possible; a 14 year old ?? for Budda's sake!! Completelyy unacceptable in any country or society.
Please stop trying to excuse this vile, sickening behaviour....

There was no mention of this in the article
So it was bad reporting?

If you take it at face value then its very vague. But if it is as you describe it then yes he should be charged. No mention of any of this in the Sydney morning herald article. With the information that you presented it does indeed sound a lot more serious.

[Brisboy82]

Guys, please do a little bot of research instead of jumping to conclusions....the travel agent was taped bragging that whilst in Thailand on holiday he picked up a 14 year old boy who was very experienced...or something to that effect...so the word boy and 14 years old was mentioned.
Scum like this should be punished as they say"to the fulkl extent of the law"or even further if possible; a 14 year old ?? for Budda's sake!! Completelyy unacceptable in any country or society.
Please stop trying to excuse this vile, sickening behaviour....

There was no mention of this in the article
So it was bad reporting?

If you take it at face value then its very vague. But if it is as you describe it then yes he should be charged. No mention of any of this in the Sydney morning herald article. With the information that you presented it does indeed sound a lot more serious.

I now feel better about this guy getting chafed and hope ye gets what he deserves.

The only problem I have now is that they are associating this scumbag with the gay community. This kind of activity has nothing to do with being gay and I am so sick of this stuff tarnishing the gay community! Why did they have to mention the gay thing it's irrelevant to this case.

How's it irrelevant? - he's a poof.

He may (or may not) be a paedophile poof but he's a poof.

Sorry if that upsets those of you who like to think you're some kind of respectable poof - as opposed to tranny poofs or S&M poofs or scatlover poofs, or any other type of poof you care to distance yourselves from.

I'm also intrigued by latintopxxx's comment that this poof should be punished "to the full extent of the law or even further if possible"
Bearing in mind that the "offence" seems to be one of bragging rather than there being any concrete evidence at this point - what exactly are you suggesting?
Some kind of vigilante action?
Would you like him beaten, stabbed, shot, set on fire, and his corpse dragged round the streets, on the basis of bragging perhaps?
If so that's a bit rich coming from somebody whom other posters on here have described as a deviant.

I suspect what's really pissing a lot of folk off is that the story is a little too close to home for comfort.

[Brisboy82]

How's it irrelevant? - he's a poof.

He may (or may not) be a paedophile poof but he's a poof.

Sorry if that upsets those of you who like to think you're some kind of respectable poof - as opposed to tranny poofs or S&M poofs or scatlover poofs, or any other type of poof you care to distance yourselves from.

I'm also intrigued by latintopxxx's comment that this poof should be punished "to the full extent of the law or even further if possible"
Bearing in mind that the "offence" seems to be one of bragging rather than there being any concrete evidence at this point - what exactly are you suggesting?
Some kind of vigilante action?
Would you like him beaten, stabbed, shot, set on fire, and his corpse dragged round the streets, on the basis of bragging perhaps?
If so that's a bit rich coming from somebody whom other posters on here have described as a deviant.

I suspect what's really pissing a lot of folk off is that the story is a little too close to home for comfort.

There was no mention whatsoever of this guy being gay. Only that he claimed to
Have sex with a 14 year old boy. That would make him a pedophile not gay.

There was no mention whatsoever of this guy being gay. Only that he claimed to have sex with a 14 year old boy. That would make him a pedophile not gay.

What a crock of shit.

Maybe he once shagged an 18yo what would that make him?

:sign5:

[Brisboy82]

How's it irrelevant? - he's a poof.

He may (or may not) be a paedophile poof but he's a poof.

Sorry if that upsets those of you who like to think you're some kind of respectable poof - as opposed to tranny poofs or S&M poofs or scatlover poofs, or any other type of poof you care to distance yourselves from.

I'm also intrigued by latintopxxx's comment that this poof should be punished "to the full extent of the law or even further if possible"
Bearing in mind that the "offence" seems to be one of bragging rather than there being any concrete evidence at this point - what exactly are you suggesting?
Some kind of vigilante action?
Would you like him beaten, stabbed, shot, set on fire, and his corpse dragged round the streets, on the basis of bragging perhaps?
If so that's a bit rich coming from somebody whom other posters on here have described as a deviant.

I suspect what's really pissing a lot of folk off is that the story is a little too close to home for comfort.

Also if this guy was bragging about having sex with a 14 year old that in itself
Is a punishable crime. At least in Australia. It is an imprisonable offence to show intent to have underage sex even if you didn't actually commit the act. That is why people have been sent to prison based on police stings where a police officer pretends to be someone underage. It is also why sone have been arrested attempting to leave for Thailand when evidence has shown that they intend to pursue underage
Sex there.

Don't you know the difference between bragging about having done something (past) and inciting a crime to be committed (future)?

Point me to one case where a person has been convicted where the only evidence is of "bragging"of having done something.

I can wait.

Meanwhile the thread will be deleted.

[Brisboy82]

Don't you know the difference between bragging about having done something (past) and inciting a crime to be committed (future)?

Point me to one case where a person has been convicted where the only evidence is of "bragging"of having done something.

I can wait.

Meanwhile the thread will be deleted.

As I said the law clearly states that intent Or claiming to have done so is a crime regardless of whether or not the act took place. It's as simple as that. The bragging in itself could be taken as being intent.

Bragging about a past event - which may not even have taken place - is not intent.

It might indicate a predisposition but it is not intent

Thank God you are not a lawyer.

[Brisboy82]

Bragging about a past event is not intent.

Thank God you are not a lawyer.

Would you not at least keep your distance from somebody who bragged of such things? The law wouldn't simply let it slide. Anybody who brags of such thing has got be be a pretty low character.

Bragging about a past event is not intent.

Thank God you are not a lawyer.

Would you not at least keep your durance (sic) from somebody who bragged of such things? The law wouldn't simply let it slide.

Somebody who would brag of such things would be very foolish - and I do not knowingly associate either with fools or with child molestors.

A few minutes ago you had the guy tried, convicted and sentenced - with no evidence whatsoever other than his "bragging" - I'm glad to see that some sense has come into your thinking and you are now moderating your stance to 'it would have to be investigated'.
That's progress.

Maybe you could have a word with your more extreme soulmate, latintopxxx, who has the guy hung drawn and quartered whether he did it or not .

[Brisboy82]

[quote="scottish-guy":33xz4clm]Bragging about a past event is not intent.

Thank God you are not a lawyer.

Would you not at least keep your durance (sic) from somebody who bragged of such things? The law wouldn't simply let it slide.

Somebody who would brag of such things would be very foolish - and I do not knowingly associate either with fools or with child molestors.

A few minutes ago you had the guy tried, convicted and sentenced - with no evidence whatsoever other than his "bragging" - I'm glad to see that some sense has come into your thinking and you are now moderating your stance to 'it would have to be investigated'.
That's progress.

Maybe you could have a word with your more extreme soulmate, latintopxxx, who has the guy hung drawn and quartered whether he did it or not .[/quote:33xz4clm]

I agree that my initial response was a bit harsh an once I took personal feeling out of it amd looked at the issue
Objectively I softened my stance. I guess that is what trials are for.

Exactly!

:salute:

[Marsilius]

....a 14 year old ?? for Budda's sake!! Completelyy unacceptable in any country or society....

Evidently not so in Spain where it seems, according to Wikipedia, that the age of consent is 13 (and that's not a legacy from the unenlightened distant past - it was fixed as recently as 1999 when it was raised from 12).

It's somewhat ironic, therefore, that latintopxxx's profile gives his location as Barcelona.

Brisboy, dont you think everyone can read the ongoing thread? There really is no need to quote the last six posters and their comments.

SG, I have a question, please. :dontknow: If a person bragged that he had committed a felony, would that be and admission to have done that crime? I am confused as I believe the man bragged that he had had sex with a 14 year old and not that he "wanted" to or it was possible. Wouldn't that change the word from "intent" to a confession of committing the crime? I am certainly not a lwayer and I dont know the laws in each and every land but in reading this, this would be what I might think. :dontknow:

Justme - yes his "bragging" could be construed as a "confession" but I can't think of many jurisdictions in the civilised world where a confession does not have to be corroborated.

Very often when theres a major crime you get people who couldn't possibly have committed the crime, confessing to it. And guess what - they confess to the cops!
These confessions are discarded because, after investigation, there's no corroboration

This guy appears to have confessed to something but as yet there is no corroberation - the fairly innocuous photographs do not appear to provide that corroboration unless the boys in the photographs can be traced and subsequently confirm that something happened.

Until corroberation of a substantive kind emerges (and from the limited information posted I would suggest that there is nothing substantive in there) , investigation can certainly take place but with no realistic chance of conviction.
So until then Latintopxxx will have to curtail his bloodlust.

Maybe the guy had nookies with a 14yo, maybe he didn't and he's just a bigmouth, and a very foolish one at that :dontknow:
Unlike some others I don't jump at the chance to be judge, jury, and executioner, that's all

BUT ANYHOO - this is all nothing to do with the charges against him - in so far as the guy is not being charged or prosecuted over sex with a 14yo - it is over organising sex tours. A totally different matter and in saying that I realise that we have all been drawn off track. :idea1: :idea1:

Basically this guy is accused of telling the undercover cop that he could organise trips to Thailand for him, and that on those trips the customer could procure underage boys in certain areas. Now this is significant because as far as I can tell from the limited info given, the accused does not seem to have offered to procure these boys himself, merely indicating to the undercover cop where he might find them.

So.................. when people on SGT post about being disgusted by the goings-on in certain areas of Pattaya, are they guilty of the same "offence"??

[latintopxxx]

scottish-guy
link is below, article was in the New Zealand press, guess they must have moved on from sheep to boys down there.....as for your comments trying to protect this vile creature behind definitions of intent...or whatever....maybe you should seek employment as an investment banker...the only sub-species I believe would happily co-exist with paedophiles.


http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/artic ... d=10763179 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10763179)

scottish-guy
link is below, article was in the New Zealand press, guess they must have moved on from sheep to boys down there.....as for your comments trying to protect this vile creature behind definitions of intent...or whatever....maybe you should seek employment as an investment banker...the only sub-species I believe would happily co-exist with paedophiles.


http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/artic ... d=10763179 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10763179)


Well I did wonder how long it would take your "argument" to degerate into name calling and innuendo. That's ok with me - I now know the level you are operating on and I can tailor my responses appropriately.

I do not need to follow your link - I am concerned with principles not particular circumstances.
What I am interested in is Civil Liberties and, unlike you, I do not choose which Civil Liberties I am for or against.

One of the most basic ones is "innocent until proven guilty" - you obviously do not subscribe to that one and boy do I hope you find yourself in a situation in the future where you come to regret that.

Another Civil Liberty you don't seem to subscribe to is the right to a fair trial (which includes appropriate sentencing) - you have already proclaimed that this "vile creature" (who is innocent at the moment) ought to be dealt with beyond the extent of the law - presumably you want him lynched or something?

And as I pointed out, your own sexual proclivities have been the subject of much comment on this forum - could it possibly be that you are seeking to make yourself feel better about your own deviancy?

:dontknow:

[jinks]

This thread is coming close to breaking rule #4.

Don't encorage underage sex. Please take care, use a take care condom too!

[Neal]

Oh my! Well stated jinksie!

This thread is coming close to breaking rule #4.

Don't encorage underage sex. Please take care, use a take care condom too!

I see no encouragement of that whatsoever, I see a quasi-legal debate over a case of a guy charged with running sex tours.

However if you think it's breaking rule #4 then delete the thread - I'm sure nobody cares that much :dontknow:

[Neal]

Oh Scottie darling, I dont think he meant you, just the thread in general.
Don't get your knickers in an uproar now. :jok:

[latintopxxx]

scotty-girl and knickers....impossible...scots don├╜ wear them......and scotty-boy if others besides myself think you are flying the wrong flag it should give you a reason to rethink your thought train.....

[Neal]

Sorry scotty, kilt. :jok:

[christianpfc]

An interesting thread, let me add this quotation from the movie: Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan


When i first bought my wife she had tight vagine, then 3 years later, at 15 she had vagine like wizards cloak
(from the internet, maybe the exact words in the movie are different, but the sense is the as I remember the movie)

My point: If a stranger told me the he had met (meaning had intercourse with) underage boys (or girls) I wouldn't believe him (and yet I would avoid further company). I know there are people who do, but why would they tell strangers about it?

[latintopxxx]

christianpfc....Thailand has a weird effect on many people...the easy sex...tropical weather...cheap+plentiful alcohol....almost like the rules don't apply....conversations with strangers after a few beers in the heat and you get told the weirdest tales....even if only a small percentage are true still scary....
...and as for scotty-boys blabla blabla....all I hear is how can we manipulate the law in order to set this monster free to prey on his defenseless victims....

he doth protest to much me lord .... maybe he has something to hide ??

[lonelywombat]

he doth protest to much me lord .... maybe he has something to hide ??

not sure which poster you are referring to, but the obsession with court cases similar to this, was the favoured pastime for a former parking ranger, now banned yet again.

I have always been amused by the politicians, clergy, military, scout leadersand others who condemn gays, peds and so on, but get caught out doing the same thing themselves.

Every time I see posts like this, I always think the poster is trying to deflect the scorn away from themselves. As if justifying their "purity' by pointing out their public condemning of others.
Reading this thread brings back those same opinions yet again.

.......all I hear is how can we manipulate the law in order to set this monster free to prey on his defenseless victims....

Your problem is that you only "hear" what you want to hear.

The "monster" is, at this moment in time, innocent in law.
There is no victim, and currently there is not even a specific allegation of a victim.

If that changes, if more emerges, and if the guy is convicted, then you will have the right to label him however you please

If you find it outrageous that I refuse to join your lynch mob and take to the streets with my flaming torch and pitchfork - because somebody said something which may or may not be true - then I apologise for being rational.

:bootyshake:

[danny99]

Guys, please do a little bot of research instead of jumping to conclusions....the travel agent was taped bragging that whilst in Thailand on holiday he picked up a 14 year old boy who was very experienced...or something to that effect...so the word boy and 14 years old was mentioned.
Scum like this should be punished as they say"to the fulkl extent of the law"or even further if possible; a 14 year old ?? for Budda's sake!! Completelyy unacceptable in any country or society.
Please stop trying to excuse this vile, sickening behaviour....

Funny, I think that is the legal age in Denmark.

[jinks]

I think that is the legal age in Denmark.

Portugal too !

[gaymandenmark]

The legal age is 15 in Denmark, BUT if you have any kind of authority over the "child" you can be punished AND you are not allowed to have sex with anyone under 18 if it is a sex for money relationship.
If a 50-60 year old man had sex with a 16 year young lad, I am sure they will look into if there have been any kind of pressure or money involved
I think it is almost the same rules as in Thailand? Although I know that prostitution is official prohibited by the law in Thailand and not in Denmark.

Let's set a few facts straight here. The person in question here is not a paedophile.
Contrary to what has been said here, he is also not a travel agent. The web site OTR was initially set up as a sideline, with the intention of assisting gay New Zealanders who had never visited
Thailand before, with their holiday plans, such as guided tours. It was never his
intention to arrange sex tours for paedophiles.

The person in question is a member of SGT who has not only made many posts here, but
has also personally met many of it's members. If you knew who he was, you would
be more convinced of his innocence. I am sure that once this trial is finished, he will hopefully
be able to post here and will reveal himself.

The approach by the police officer to arrange a tour for him, was the first enquiry
that the website OTR had ever received. When the officer enquired about the
possibility of under-age sex, he was clearly told by the defendant that he would
play no part in arranging such a thing. He also told the officer that he should wait
until he got there, as he would see that the boys there look a lot younger than they
actually are.

Personally, I have never ever known him on his many visits to Thailand, to go with a boy that
is under the age of 18, despite what was reported about the 14 year old. In addition
to this, all of the boys photographed with him are of 18 years of age or above. If this
had not been the case when his bags were searched last December on returning
to NZ, why wasn't he questioned at that time.

His case is a clear one of police entrapment and without the police involvement,
this trial would have never have seen the light of day. There are NO other witnesses
in this case other than the police.

As someone has pointed out here already, the police have spent a lot of time and money on
this investigation, and I believe only proceeded with this case for those reasons. As would be said in Thailand: they didn't want to loose face.

He is giving evidence tomorrow, and I sincerely hope that justice will be done by
him being acquitted of a charge, that should never have been brought against him in
the first place. I for one wish him the very best of luck this week, and even if
wrongly convicted, with the shaky police evidence already given, I am sure he will will
be exonerated on an appeal.

Cheers,

George.

Thanks for that George, but what you have posted are not facts at all, but the accused's version of events -which may or may not be facts. If indeed the version you have given is accurate (and I do not know who he is, so I can't make a judgement based on knowing him) then I too wish the person the very best of luck

See how even-handed I am?
Latintopxxx take note.

:occasion9:

[Brad the Impala]

The person in question is a member of SGT who has not only made many posts here, but
has also personally met many of it's members.



Then he must surely be innocent, although if looking for character references, I am not sure that the first choice would be someone who .....deleted...Daboss

deleted....DaBoss

[mj_87-old]

deleted....DaBoss

deleted DaBoss

Topics such as this are always valuable - each time one appears it gives a fresh opportunity for certain SGT members to reinforce how remarkably obnoxious they can be, and for the rest of us to make a fresh mental note to continue to cross the road to avoid being in their pernicious company.

In this thread so far we have had the spectacle of one person (the original subject of the topic) vilified, branded a paedophile, called a "monster", and the sinister suggestion made that he should be dealt with beyond the full extent of the law - which presumably means instigating some kind of vigilante action involving inflicting physical violence on him.
All this when the person has not been charged with any sexual offence involving any physical contact whatsoever, far less convicted of same.

Then we have another member (George) who posts his view and immediately encounters snide remarks over a case where he was found NOT GUILTY, including being asked the size of the bribe he paid to secure an acquittal.

Some of you guys are frankly disgusting.

:occasion9:

Topics such as this are always valuable - each time one appears it gives a fresh opportunity for certain SGT members to reinforce how remarkably obnoxious they can be, and for the rest of us to make a fresh mental note to continue to cross the road to avoid being in their pernicious company.

In this thread so far we have had the spectacle of one person (the original subject of the topic) vilified, branded a paedophile, called a "monster", and the sinister suggestion made that he should be dealt with beyond the full extent of the law - which presumably means instigating some kind of vigilante action involving inflicting physical violence on him.
All this when the person has not been charged with any sexual offence involving any physical contact whatsoever, far less convicted of same.

Then we have another member (George) who posts his view and immediately encounters snide remarks over a case where he was found NOT GUILTY, including being asked the size of the bribe he paid to secure an acquittal.

Some of you guys are frankly disgusting.

:occasion9:

Thanks for your comments Scotty, I couldn't agree with them more. I will resist the temptation of replying to any further snide comments with regard to myself. The facts about my own case are already well documented.

Cheers,

George.

Scottie makes some excellent points here about the rules of evidence and legal interpretation, and I also concur with wombat when he wrote:


Every time I see posts like this, I always think the poster is trying to deflect the scorn away from themselves. As if justifying their "purity' by pointing out their public condemning of others.

The important thing to get into perspective, whether you are gay, straight or bi, is that a paedophile is someone who is physically attracted to young people who are sexually immature. To be physically attracted to someone who has reached sexual maturity but is not yet of legal age is perfectly normal, but society demands (quite rightly) that a young person's lack of mental maturity is respected, especially with regard to commercial sex.

If a gay guy fancies a post-pubescent 14yr old boy, then that's OK, provided he doesn't make his feelings known to the boy, and doesn't touch.

If his fantasising morphs into bragging, then the guy's an idiot, but not (without evidence) a criminal or paedophile.

As rightly pointed out by the positive comments those that have posted slanderous, bigoted posts about people they don't know, and have been formed on pure hearsay need to take a long good look at themselves in a mirror. No better still don't bother, as what they would see in their own reflection would be far too grotesque to say the least!

Please get back on topic. With thanks! DaBoss

[mj_87-old]

As rightly pointed out by the positive comments those that have posted slanderous, bigoted posts about people they don't know, and have been formed on pure hearsay need to take a long good look at themselves in a mirror. No better still don't bother, as what they would see in their own reflection would be far too grotesque to say the least!

Please get back on topic. With thanks! DaBoss

The problem is that some of us are making comments about people we do know.
The NZ case seems like over reach by the authorities - One hopes for a sensible jury but that may be asking too much.

Isn't it always the case that those with the most to say, are more often than not, the most uninformed?

For those unaware, there is no jury in this case. It is being tried solely by one judge.

Cheers,

George.

[Brad the Impala]

Accused sex tour operator 'wanted money'
By Edward Gay
7:00 PM Wednesday Nov 2, 2011

TEXT DELETED. It brings into play our underage rule. If you read the article be very careful what you post. jinks

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10763457

[Brad the Impala]

From an earlier day in the trial:

Recordings of accused man heard in Thai sex tour case
By Edward Gay
3:15 PM Tuesday Nov 1, 2011

TEXT DELETED. It brings into play our underage rule. If you read the article be very careful what you post. jinks

Interesting that everyone seems to assume that the information the police have given to the media is accurate!

Cross posted from Thaivisa:

The defendant has been to Thailand several times over the last ten years - mostly with his father, a medical scientist, to take medical equipment to refugees on the Thai/Burma border.

He has also visited some of the gay night spots in Bangkok and Pattaya.

Customs inspected his laptop on his return. They found nothing objectionable.

Police reported to the media that he had claimed he had been to bed with a 14 year old Thai boy. Under cross examination the undercover policeman admitted he had not said this.

Police reported to the media that the undercover policeman had 'been offered a sex tour.' Again, under cross examination, the police officer admitted this was not true, and that he raised with the defendant the possibility of finding a 'young friend.'

The defendant has been charged with promoting and organising a sex tour.

The CrownтАЩs case for the promoting charge is that the words тАШyour special interestsтАЩ on the defendantтАЩs website http://www.overtherainbow.co.nz are a code for unlawful sexual activity.

The defendant says this simply means what it says тАУ that if a client was interested in WWII sites, or diving, or temples, etc, a tour could be organised around those interests. The website and sample itinerary seem to confirm this.

On the organising charge, the defendant says he suspected his тАШclientтАЩ was interested in underage boys. He tried to steer him in the direction of activities which would meet his needs and be safe and legal.

In the end he wrote an email in which he confirmed he would not organise or participate in anything illegal, and asked the client to accept this as a condition of moving forward. Five days later the client emailed back saying he still wanted to go ahead.

The police case is essentially that the defendant should have known the undercover police officer still intended to act illegally, and therefore that making flight and hotel bookings for him was 'facilitating the use of prostitutes under the age of eighteen.' In their view, that constitutes 'organising a c**** sex tour.'

But the real question is surely, if there is c**** sex tourism being organised in New Zealand, why did the police spend eight months of their time, and vast amounts of taxpayer money, pursuing someone who had never organised a sex tour, and on the evidence so far, never had any intention of doing so?

[Brad the Impala]

Another character witness, with a newly created handle, for a man who has been taped boasting of his activities with underage boys, either because they were true, or because he was trying to encourage a potential customer.

http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/taxi-drivers-aware-sex-tourists-4495385

[Neal]

As jinks has recently pointed out to me, copying and pasting these articles allows bots and spiders to pick up and direct people to our site whereas copying and pasting a url to a newspaper article does not.

Therefore I would like to request those that keep copying and pasting these articles to this forum and and ask them to just make comments on the articles and use the urls where the articles are located.

DaBoss

Another character witness, with a newly created handle...

It's quite possible that "Sutherland" may be a newly created handle for an established poster who has something to say on this topic but refuses to post using his regular ID - an act which would surely result in smears, innuendo, and vitriol spewing forth from SGT lynch mob.

Unfortunately that is what this forum has come to whenever such matters are discussed.

On the other hand "Sutherland" may genuinely be a new poster - perhaps an observer until now but who has decided to speak his mind on this topic - both perfectly rational possibilities I would suggest, rather than any conspiracy or duplicity as seems to be the insinuation.

[lonelywombat]

[quote="Brad the Impala":z8bgiq4k]Another character witness, with a newly created handle...

It's quite possible that "Sutherland" may be a newly created handle for an established poster who has something to say on this topic but refuses to post using his regular ID - an act which would surely result in smears, innuendo, and vitriol spewing forth from SGT lynch mob.Unfortunately that is what this forum has come to whenever such matters are discussed.

On the other hand "Sutherland" may genuinely be a new poster - perhaps an observer until now but who has decided to speak his mind on this topic - both perfectly rational possibilities I would suggest, rather than any conspiracy or duplicity as seems to be the insinuation.[/quote:z8bgiq4k]

Scottish-guy I think the lynch mob have been castrated by the new owner but I have been surprised that Brads posts, have survived. Why the subject was considered as important for this forum I dont know, Thankfully DaBoss has gently indicated the old ways are just that . Good to see the forum is moving in a positive direction.

[Brad the Impala]

As jinks has recently pointed out to me, copying and pasting these articles allows bots and spiders to pick up and direct people to our site whereas copying and pasting a url to a newspaper article does not.

Therefore I would like to request those that keep copying and pasting these articles to this forum and and ask them to just make comments on the articles and use the urls where the articles are located.

DaBoss

Appreciate that the answer to this may need to come from jinks, but why in particular do these articles, as opposed to any other articles, allow bots and spiders to pick us up? And isn't directing people to the site what you want to do?

[jinks]

And isn't directing people to the site what you want to do?

Yes, but not for the "against the rules" reasons.

If I put the infringement words here they will be indexed by bots and show a different bad slant on this forum's content.

[Brad the Impala]

I see. Thanks for the explanation. The last thing this forum needs is more positive p********* posts, perhaps that's why GB's forum seems to get swamped with threads on this.

[Brad the Impala]

This man has now been found guilty of organizing a c**** sex tour, and it has been revealed in court, prior to sentencing, both that he faces a further trial on additional charges and that he had previous convictions for child sex offences.

http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/man-guilty-organising-thai-child-sex-tour-4523043



Let's set a few facts straight here. The person in question here is not a p********.
Cheers,
George.

[Neal]

Brad, thank you very much for the updated information and link to the new story. SGF is absolutely against the exploitation of minors as I hope its members are.

He was found not guilty of two charges of promoting a c**** sex tour and has been remanded in custody for sentencing on February 14.
sorry are you reading the same report as the one you posted ??
i hate and would wish death on anyone who abuses children but in this day and age saying you like children is now an offence .. people used to say shirley temple was a cute looking girl .. say something like that about a young girl now a days and you are automaticaly a *wrongun*. what where his other convictions ??? maybe he hugged his nephew to hard ? im glad as hell im not a p.c. correct person... id imagine the cops in N.Z. would love to jail anyone who finds their sheep unattractive.. lordy mumma .. get me out of here
p.s. do we really need posts like this .. lets concentrate on the good things that go on in thailand and leave all this perverted shyte to mr buttons site

{unwanted words deleted, we don't want to be indexed with them - jinks}

[Brisboy82]

The reason that I originally mentioned this article is the fact that they seemed to have sent an undercover cop to spy on this guy based on not much more than the fact that he was a gay man travelling to Thailand. The rest came up during the course of the investigation and most of that was false accusation too.

I still find it disturbing that all this initially came out of nothing much more than simply the fact that he was apparently gay.

[Brad the Impala]

The reason that I originally mentioned this article is the fact that they seemed to have sent an undercover cop to spy on this guy based on not much more than the fact that he was a gay man travelling to Thailand. The rest came up during the course of the investigation and most of that was false accusation too.

I still find it disturbing that all this initially came out of nothing much more than simply the fact that he was apparently gay.

Did you miss the part about him having a website offering special tours to Thailand, and with him being a convicted c**** sex offender, and Thailand being a popular p**** destination, it wasn't too hard to guess what was going to be special about the tours.......................

Don't let your gay paranoia run away with you.

{unwanted words deleted, we don't want to be indexed with them - jinks}

[Thai Dyed]

it wasn't too hard to guess what was going to be special about the tours.......................


Birthday Parties?
[attachment=0:tpa8vfig]Brad the Impala My22ndBirthday TD edit.jpg[/attachment:tpa8vfig]

[quote="Brad the Impala":2joq3bjl] it wasn't too hard to guess what was going to be special about the tours.......................


Birthday Parties?
[attachment=0:2joq3bjl]Brad the Impala My22ndBirthday TD edit.jpg[/attachment:2joq3bjl][/quote:2joq3bjl]
did someone steal the flowers ?? or the statue ? those guys could be 20 quiet easy

... those guys could be 20 quiet easy

Except for Brad.

[Brisboy82]

The reason that I originally mentioned this article is the fact that they seemed to have sent an undercover cop to spy on this guy based on not much more than the fact that he was a gay man travelling to Thailand. The rest came up during the course of the investigation and most of that was false accusation too.

I still find it disturbing that all this initially came out of nothing much more than simply the fact that he was apparently gay.

Did you miss the part about him having a website offering special tours to Thailand, and with him being a convicted c**** sex offender, and Thailand being a popular p**** destination, it wasn't too hard to guess what was going to be special about the tours.......................

Don't let your gay paranoia run away with you.

{unwanted words deleted, we don't want to be indexed with them - jinks}
There was no mention of any of that in the article. The travel website mentions nothing of that content in it tours. It said it caters to all various needs as should any travel site.

Besides all of that those things came up after investigation so the question you have to ask I'd why was he investigated in te first place. The story says that the reason he was investigated was because he had photos of his arm around 'teenage looking males' well that would mean that pretty much everybody in this forum would ve under investigation if that's all it takes.

Also thailands reputation as a destination for those kind of people is irrelevant unless there is further evidence.

Millions of tourists visit Thailand eery year and the vast majority are not there for that purpose.

Also despite what some people in this forum seem to think most people who visit Thailand are not sex tourists at all.

Most people I know go to Thailand occasionally usually either young people as backpackers and older people on family holiday. No sex tourists that I know of.

[Brad the Impala]

There was no mention of any of that in the article

Suggest that you read the reports of the trial, to which links have already been provided, the reports of what the accused is on tape as saying, and the reports about previous convictions that were admissable in court only after he had been found guilty, but of which the police would have been aware prior to investigating his tours. While many of us have been photographed with our arms around young thai men, most of us neither have previous convictions, nor are we running tours to Thailand.

Also despite what some people in this forum seem to think most people who visit Thailand are not sex tourists at all.Most people that go to Thailand more than once are sex tourists IMHO.

[Brisboy82]

Also despite what some people in this forum seem to think most people who visit Thailand are not sex tourists at all.Most people that go to Thailand more than once are sex tourists IMHO.

Most repeat visitors that I know are
Families who take their annual family holiday in Phuket and young women who go to party in ko phangan. I don't know any single men who are going to Thailand regularly like that. Mostly families.

Phuket seems to be the second most popular destination for family holidays after Bali.

[Beachlover]

This man has now been found guilty of organizing a ***** *** tour, and it has been revealed in court, prior to sentencing, both that he faces a further trial on additional charges and that he had previous convictions for child sex offences.
I only just read this thread in full. The details given early on in the OP didn't hold much hope for him being convicted (or being deserving of conviction).

But the stuff that's come out later in the thread doesn't make for a pretty picture. So I'm glad the guy's been convicted and will be doing jail time... I wonder if it also means he won't be able to return to Thailand. I hope that'll be the case. Way too many of these creepy creepinsteins in Thailand...


The person in question is a member of SGT who has not only made many posts here...
He's a member here? Well, he won't be posting or revealing his identity anytime soon... No prizes for guessing where he hung out in Pattaya either!



Also despite what some people in this forum seem to think most people who visit Thailand are not sex tourists at all.Most people that go to Thailand more than once are sex tourists IMHO.
Load of shite... I know plenty of people who go to Thailand regularly and aren't sex tourists. You probably get that perception from the people you hang around with and the places you tend to go while in Thailand.